GOVT. COLLEGE. LISR^RY
KOTA (Raj.)
Students can retain library books only for two
weeks at the most.
— ■■■■■ ■ — P ' ' - - - r ■ - ,
OORROW^R'S
No.
DUE DTATE
SIGNATURE
NON-VIOLENCE
IN
PEACE & WAR
Vol. I
M. K. GANDH5
NAv AJIVAN PUBLISHING HOUSE
AroiEDABAD
First Edition, 2,000 Copies^ 1942
Second Edition, 2,200 Copies, 1944
Third Edition, G,000 Copies, 1948
Priatod by DhUubh i Dalai, at the Associated Advertisers & Printers Ltd., w05, Arthur
Uoad,Tard20, li*''mbay 7, and Published by Jivanji Daliyablitti DcsaljN^avajlvan
PubJishlng House, Kalupur, Ahmedabad.
. NON-^VIOLENCE IN EVOLUTION
Scientific discoveries make books on the various sciences
out of date within a short time of their publication. A student
of medicine reading books on the aetiology of cancer, for in-
stance, v/ould go to the latest books on the subject, and reject
one published two or even one decade ago. Books on surgery
published fifty years ago, however valuable then, would not,
at an old bookseller’s, fetch even the cost of printing them. A
monument of research and industry, Hume’s History oj England,
is not read nowadays, as historical research since its publication
has made many statements of fact inaccurate or imtrue.
Not so, however, with books of spiritual science. Sage
Patanjali gave his Yoga aphorisms centuries ago. Books about
the date of Patanjali written fifty years ago would be displaced
by later researches. But no commentary, provided it is written
by one who has tried to carry out the aphorisms in actual prac-
tice, can be out of date, no matter when it was written. For
each represents the result of the author’s spiritual experience
and growth, and every step towards the goal of self-realization
offers help and guidance to pilgrims on the path. Every such
pilgrim is an experimenter in the laboratory of Truth which is
Infinite, The discovery of Truth will never be complete, and
any honest record of earnest striving has its value. It is from
that point of view that this book, which reppduces chronolo-
gically all the most important writings of Gandhiji on the sub-
ject of Non-violence, is of the greatest value to those who will
follow Truth at all costs and who recognize that Non-violence
is the road to that pursuit. This is all the more so when one
realizes that Gandhiji’s experiments in Truth and Non-violence
are not only in pursuit of Truth but also in pursuit of aims
which one describes as mundane. Prof. Toynbee, the celebrated
Research Professor of International History, has, in the monu-
mental volumes of A Study of History, drawn this distinction.
“Gentleness” — which he says, might equally well be called ‘Non-
violence’ — looks a superficial negative label, but carefully exa-
mined it “covers more than one positive reality”, and he
reveals four distinct positive meanings of the term. Thus “at
its lowest the practice of Non-violence may express nothing
more noble or more constructive than a cjmical disillusionment
with the fruitlessness of a violence which has been previously
practised ad nauseum without having produced the intended
results. A notorious example of a non-violence of this unedif}"-
ing kind is the religious toleration which has been in vogue in
the Western world from about the last quarter of the seventeenth
century of the Christian era down to our own day. Alterna-
tively, Non-violence may express a conviction that man’s divine-
ly allotted role in the economy of the universe is to adopt a
patiently passive attitude towards a mundane scene on which
it is God’s exclusive prerogative to execute His divine will
through His own action — which would be hampered and not
assisted, if man were to presume to intervene in what is wholly
God’s business. Such is, for example, the conviction that under-
lies the Non-violence of Agudath Israel, This second philoso-
phy of Non-violence is as pious and as scrupulous as our first is'
imprincipled and cynical; but at the same time it resembles the
Non-violence of disillusionment in being unconstructive. Non-
violence may, however, also be practised as a means to some
y/constructive end; and such an end, again, may be either mun-
dane or ‘other-worldly’. A classic example of the practice of
non-violence for a mundane end is presented in Mahatma
Gandhi’s political tactics of Non-violent Non-cooperation. The
aim of Mr, Gandhi and his followers is to obtain for the people
of India the political boon of complete self-government; and
the pursuit of this aim by these tactics is ewdence of a high
degree of intellectual and moral originality; for the aim in view .
has been valued at its present enormously current price in a
Western Vanity Fair; and our Western nationalists have seldom
or never abstained from resorting to violence — of heart, if not
of hand — in their endeavours to gain possession of this coveted
pearl. Mr. Gandhi’s tactical recourse of Non-violence is there-
fore a noteworthy new departure in the political technique cf a
V/esternized ‘Great Society’; but it is not, of course, so great a
departure as a practice of Non-\iolence for reasons which are
not just tactical but are strategic. WHiile Mr. Gandhi practises
Non-\dolence because he considers this to be the most efScacious
means of pursuing an aim that is mundane, the Non-violence of
Jesus and Johann ben Zakkai is a reflection on the mundane
plane, of a transference of the field of action from that mun-
dane plane to another.”
But Prof. Arnold To^mbee does not quite see the reason
wdiy Gandhiji has dared to experiment the method of Non-
V
violence on the mundane plane. It is precisely because Gan-
dhiji refuses to make any distinction between the mundane and
the ‘other-worldly’ plane so far as the moral and physical laws ^
which govern them are concerned. For him the outside uni-
verse is but a reflection of the inside universe, and he repeats
time and again that “the universe is compressed in the atom.
There is not one law for the atom and another for the universe.*’
It is not only the eye of the poet that enables him
To see a world in a grain of sand
And a heaven in a wild flower,
Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand,
And Eternity in an hour.
iDut an actual spiritual experience that gives the conviction that
moral principles have no meaning unless they can be made
to serve as guides of conduct in the daily affairs of men. It is
therefore as a steady growth and evolution of the meaning and
implications of Non-violence that this volume deserves to be
' studied by all who aspire to practise it for mundane or ultra-
mundane ends. There is no royal road to train individuals or
communities in the difficult art of Non-Violence, except, as he
says, “through living the creed in your life which must be a
living sermon. The expression in one’s own life presupposes
great study, tremendous perseverance, and thorough cleansing
of one’s self of all the impurities.” And then he reveals the
tremendous superiority of the spiritual force oyer physical
force : “If for mastering of the physical sciences you have to
devote a whole lifetime, how many lifetimes may be needed
for mastering the greatest spiritual force that mankind has
known ? But why worry even if it means several lifetimes ?
For, if this is the only thing in life, if this is the only thing
that counts, then whatever effort you bestow on mastering it is
well spent. Seek ye first the Kingdom of Heaven and every- ,
thing else shall be added unto you. The Kingdom of Heaven
is Ahimsa.”
To outward seeming quite a number of contradictions will
he found in this book — as, for instance, were pointed out by
that great pacifist B. De Ligt who strongly criticized Gandhiji’s
participation in the Boer War and the First World War of
1914-18, which apparently is irreconcilable with his stubborn
vi
opposition to the present war and all wars. Thus there was a
time when he felt it necessary to say: “I would not hesitate to
advise those who would bear arms to do so and fight for the
country.” Not that he visualized a Swaraj won by violence.
“Under Swaraj of my dream there is no necessity for arms at
all,” he said, but added: “But I do not expect that dream to
materialize in its fulness as a result of the present effort,” —
he meant the Khilaf at. Struggle of 1921 — “because I do not con-
sider myself advanced enough to be able to prescribe a detailed
course of conduct to the nation for such preparation.” Again
and again he used to say in those days: “I have not yet the
attainments for preaching universal non-violence with effect.”
In one sentence he summed up the reason why even as a votary
of non-violence he did not preach non-participation in 1914-18:
“I had no status to resist participation” — ^by status meaning the
status that service of the country and active practice of the
principle for 29 years have given him now. By sufficient ser-
vice he hoped then to attain some day “the power and confi-
dence to resist the Empire’s wars and its war-like preparations.”
There was a time when he thought in terms of his duty as a
unit, however humble, of the Empire, and said that so long as
he enjoyed the peace and security that “Pax Britannica” gave,
it was his duty to serve the Empire. Today he continues to
enjoy that “peace and security”, but the peace is the peace of
the grave and the security is the security of abject slaves. His
soul, therefore, rebels against the Empire which now to him
is a synonym for iniquity, and he has vowed incessant opposi-
tion to that Empire and its war. Even twenty years ago, he
knew that India’s impotence affects and corrupts the whole of
mankind, but he realizes now as never before the implications
of that knowledge. These are no contradictions. There is no
more contradiction between them than there is between the
root and the stem and the bark of a tree and its leaves and its
flowers and its fruits. The same sap runs through all as the
same passionate pursuit of Non-violence runs through Gan-
dhiji’s life as through all that he has thought and done, said
and written. Let the student read, study, chew, and inwardly
digest all that is included in this volume, and he will find that
there is revealed in it the organic growth of a vital rule of life
vii
as of a soul aspiring not only towards Self-realization, but also
towards the emancipation of mankind from strife and blood-
shed until, to use the words of Prof. Toynbee, “Violence anni-.
hiiates itself and leaves Gentleness alone in the Field.” / '
Bombay, 15-5-42
MAHADEV DESAI
CONTENTS
Non-violence in Evolution — ^IVIahadev Desai
1. The Doctrine of the Sword 1
2 . One Step Enough for Me 4
3. The Afghan Bogey .. 6
4. Our Neighbours 8
5. The Frontier Friends 10
6. The Afghan Alarm 12
7. Foreign Policy 15
8. Soldiers 16
9. Hindus in Afghanistan 17
10. My Part in the War 19
11. Why Did I Assist in the L^ast War? 21
12. How the Hope was Shattered 24
13. My Path 26
14. Under Swaraj 28
15. V/hat of the West? 29
16. To American Friends 31
17. Compulsory Military Training 38
18. From Europe 40
19. European Civilization 46
20. A Question 49^
21. Our Impotence 50
22. In Mitigation . . . . . . . . 54
23. War or Peace ? . . 56
24. Has Non-vjolence Limits? 58^^
25. Non-resistance True and False 61
26. Stand for Non-violence 64
27. * Humanizing War * ! GG
28. War against War 68
29. Still at It 70 '
30. My Attitude towards War ^ . . 73
31. ‘ What Are We to Do ? ’ 75
32. ‘ My Attitude towards War ' ...... 78
33. Sv;ord v. Spirit 82
34. For Conscience Sake 83
35. Women and War 84
coN'x'KN'ra ix
30. A Complex Problem 00
37. The Kollof't' Pact 01)
30. Our Choice 02
30. Military ProRrammo 05
40. Dimcully ot Practice ' • 00
41. Bupor/itltlono Dio Hard 101
42. When the Brltloh Withdraw 104
43. Theory and Practice ol Non-violence (M. D.) .. 105
44. The Oroatcjit Force 110
45. A Talk on Non-violence (M. D.) 113
40. The Doom of Ponce 110
47. God of Love, not War 117
40. The Law of Our Bolnc o
40. Toachlni' of Hinduism 123
GO. Ahlmiia Conundrums 124
51. A Dl.scourso on Non-violence (M. D.) .. . . .. 127-/
G2. .Our Failure 133
53. An Appeal for Self-examination 135
54. The Choice 130
55. Martial v. Moral 141
50. More Posers (M. D.) 143-
67. Quallllcatlons of a Peace Brlpado .. ... .. 144
50. The Question of Questions (M. D.) 140
50. Me.ssaBO to China (M. D.) 140
00. LoRlcal Consequence 140
01. If I wore a Czech 151
02. Woman's Special Mission 155
03. Why Not Great Powers? 157
04. The Jews 150
05. JIow to FJcht National Ganfistorlsm ? (M. D.) . . . . 104
00. Reply to Gorman Critics 105
07. Some Questions Answered 107
00. Non-violence and World Crisis (Pyarolal) . . . . 109
09. A .Tapanoso Visitor (M. D.) 177
70. Is Non-violence Inolfcctlvo '/ . . , . ' . . 170
71. China and Japan (M. D.) • ' 101
72. A World In^ Apony— I (Pyarolal) . . . . 103
73., A World in AKony— II (Pyarolal) 102
X
CONTEKTS
74. Working of Non-violence 197
75. No Apology . . ‘ 200
76. What to Do? 201
77. The Jewish Question 205
78. Withdrawn 207
79. The Oxford Group and Moral Rearmament (M. D.) . . 208
80. The War Resolution 210
81. The Impending Crisis / .. 212
82. The Simla Visit 218
83. Source of My Sympathy 215
84. To the Brave Poles 217
85. Working, committee’s Manifesto 218
86. A Polish Sister’s Agony 225
87. Is India a Military Country? 226
88. Conundrums 228
89. India’s Attitude 232
90. On Trial 235
91. A Poser 238
92. Hindu-Muslim Clashes 239^
93. Unconditional Support? 240
94. The Hour of Trial (M. D.) 241
95. Sindh Riots 246
96. In God’s Good Hands .. 247
97. Sindh Tragedy .. * 251
98. Sindh Tragedy 254
99. A Pacifist’s Doubts (M. D.) 256
^100. Universal Conscription 257
101. The Question of Defence ' . . 258
102. More Calimany . . . . ‘ . . . 258
103. My Advice to Noakhali Hindus 2G0
104. When the British Withdraw 262
105. Some Questions (AJC.) 268
106. Two Questions from America 264
107. Of What Avail is Non-violence? 266'
108. Democracy and Non-violence 269^
109. Panic .. .. ' 270
110. How to Combat Hitlerism 272
111. Both Happy and Unhappy 274
CONTENTS/
xi
112. What to Do ? ....
113. A Vital Question
114. To Every Briton
115. “ A Cry in the Wilderness ” ?
116. The Delhi Resolution
117. Before the Gandhi Seva Sangh (M, D.)
118. The Correspondence
119. Unrepentant
120. Khansaheb’s Ahimsa
121. The Best Field for Ahimsa
122. How to Cultivate Ahimsa ? <
123. A Flaw in Ahimsa
124. Not Quite So Bad
125. What of the ‘Weak Majority’?
126. Is Non-violence Impossible ?
127. The Live Issue (M. D.)
128. Moral Support
129. What Should a Briton Do and not Do ?
130. Nazism in Its Nakedness
.131. An Interesting Discourse — I (M. D.)
132. An Interesting Discourse— II (M. D.)
133. My Idea of a Police Force
134. Non-violence of the Brave
135. Sindh
136. Another Discourse (M. D.)
137. How to Quench It ?
138. Congress Ahimsa
139. Non-violence coring Riots
140. Speech at the A. I. C. C.
141. I was Unjust because Weak
142. Some Criticism Answered
143. Viceroy-Gandhi Correspondence
144. Sindh Hindus ,
145. A British Endorsement
146. Peace Organization •
147. Real War Effort
148. A Deplorable Incident
149. ‘‘Suppose Germany Wins”
278
279-"
280
283
286
288
293
294
297
299
300
303
304
306
308
312
314
317
319
322
328
331
'334
336
337
340
343
344
345
354
356
359
362
364
366
368
371
373
Xii COZ^TEKTS
150. Plea for Calmness . . . . 375
151. Criminal Assaults .. 376
152: On Its Trial .. 380
153. Desirability of Exodus 383 .
154. Evacuation 385
155. VJUage Swaraj 386
156. ‘Scorched Earth' 388
157. Scorched Earth .• 389
158. Inhuman if True 391
159. Question Box 394
160. Non-violent Resistance ^S7
161. To Every Briton 399
162. Two Actions • 402
163. Letter to the Generalissimo 404
164. To Every Japanese .. 407
165. Fasting in Non-violent Action 411
166. To American Friends 413
APPENDICES
I. War against War— I (B. de Ligt) 416
n. War against War— n ( „ ) 421
m. ‘Cat and Mouse’ 428
IV. Non-violence the Only Way (R. B. Gregg) .. .. 433
V. We are Treated as Subhumans — We Are Asked to be
Superhuman (H. Greenburg) 440
VI. Gandhijjl Absolved 445
Vn. What Led to the Decision (M. D.) 448
vm. A. I. C. a Resolution . . . . 458
IX. Seven Days in Bombay (M. D.) 460
X. More about the Resolution (M.D.) 474
XL Creed v. Policy of Non-violence — ^K. N. Katju . . . . 480
1
THE DOCTRINE OF THE SWORD
I do believe that, where there is only a choice between
/cowardice and violence, I would advise violence. Thus when
my eldest son asked me what he should have done, had he been
present when I was almost fatally assaulted in 1908, whether
he should have run away and seen me killed or whether he
^should have used his physical force which he could and wanted
to use, and defended me, I told him that it was his duty to de-
fend me even by using violence. Hence it was that I took part
in the Boer War, the so-called Zulu Rebellion and' the late War.
Hence also do I advocate training in arms for those who believe
in the method of violence. I would rather have India resort to
arms in order to defend her honour than that she would, in a
cowardly manner, become or remain a helpless witness to her
own dishonour.
But I believe that non-violence is infinitely superior to
violence, forgiveness is more manly than punishment. Forgive- .
ness adorns a soldier. But abstinence is forgiveness only when
there is the power to punish; it is meaningless when it pretends
to proceed from a helpless creature. A mouse hardly forgives
a cat when it allows itself to be torn to pieces by her. I there-
fore appreciate the sentiment of those who cry out for the con-
dign punishment of General Dyer and his ilk. They would tear
him to pieces, if they could. But I do not believe India to be
helpless. I do not believe myself to be a helpless creature. Only
I want to use India’s and my strength 'for a better purpose.
Let me not be misunderstood. Strength does not come from^
physical capacity. It comes from an indomitable will. An
average Zulu is any way. more than a match for an average
Englishman in bodily capacity. But he flees from an English
boy, -because he fears the boy’s revolver or those who will use
. it for him. He fears death and is nerveless in spite of his burly
figure. We in India may in a moment realize that one hundred
thousand Englishmen need not frighten three hundred million
human beings. A definite forgiveness would, therefore, mean a
definite recognition of our strength. With enlightened forgive-
2
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AHID WAR
ness must come a mighty wave. of strength in us, which would
make it impossible for a Dyer and a Frank Johnson to' heap
^ afibront on India’s devoted head. It matters little to me that for
the moment I do not drive my point home- We feel too down-
trodden not to be angry and revengeful. But I must not refrain
from sajdng that India can gain more by waiving the right of
punishment. We have better work to do, a better mission to
deliver to the world.
I am not a visionary. I claim to be a practical idealist. The
religion of non-violence is not meant merely for the rishis and
saints. It is meant for the common people as well Non-
violence is the law of our species as violence is the law of the
brute. The spirit lies dormant in the brute, and he knows no
law but that of physical might. The dignity of man requires
obedience to a higher law — ^to the strength of the spirit.
I have therefore ventured to place before India the ancient
law of self-sacrifice. For satyagraha and its offshoots, non-
cooperation and civil resistance, are nothing but new names
for the law of suSering. The rishis, who discovered the law
of non-violence in the midst of violence, were greater geniuses
than Newton. They were themselves greater warriors than
Wellington. Having themselves known the use of arms, they
realized their uselessness, and taught a weary world that its
salvation lay not through violence but through non-violence.
y/ Non-violence in its dynamic condition means conscious
suffering. It does not mean meek submission to the will of the
evil-doer, but it means putting of one’s whole soul against the
will of the tyrant. Working uiider this 'law of our being, it is
possible for a single individual to defy the whole might of an
unjusf^ empire to save his honour, his religion, his soul, and Jay
the foundation for that empire’s fall or its regeneration.
And so I am not pleading for India to practise non-violence
because she is weak. I want her to practise non-violence being
conscious of her strength and power. No training in arms is
reouhed for realization of her strength. We seem to need it,
beoau^^e we seem to think that we are but a lump of fiesh. I
wa’^^ India to recognize that she has a soul that cannot perish
can rise triumphant above every physical v/eakness and
de'v 'be phvsical combination of a whole world. What is the
meaning of Rama, a mere human being, with his host of mon-
THE DOCTRINE OF THE SWORD
3
keys, pitting himself against the insolent strength of ten-headed
Havana surrounded in supposed safety by the raging waters on
all sides of Lanka? Does it not mean the conquest of physical
might by spiritual strength? However, being a practical man,
I do not wait till India recognizes the practicability of the spiri-
tual life in the political world. India considers herself to be
powerless and paralysed before the machine-guns, the tanks and
the aeroplanes of the English, and takes up non-cooperation out
of her'' weakness. It must stiU serve the same purpose, namely,
bring her dehvery from the crushing weight of British injustice,
if a sufficient number of people practise it.
I isolate this non-cooperation from Sinn Feinism, for it is
so conceived as to be incapable of being offered side by side with
violence. But I invite even the school of violence to give this
peaceful non-cooperation a trial. It will not fail through its
inherent weakness. It may fail because of poverty of response.
Then will be the time for real danger. The high-souled men,
who are unable to suffer national humiliation any longer, will
want to vent their wrath. They will take to violence. So far
as I know, they must perish without delivering themselves or
their coimtry from the wrong. If India takes up the doctrine
of the sword, she may gain momentary victory. Then India will
cease to be the pride of my heart. I am wedded to India because
I owe my all to her. I believe absolutely that she has a mission
for the world- She is not to copy Europe blindly, India’s
acceptance of the doctrine of the sword .will be the hour of my
trial. I hope I shall not be found wanting. My religion has no
geographical limits. If I have a living faith in it, it will trans-
cend my love for India herself. My life is dedicated to the
service of India through the religion of non-violence which I
believe to be the root of Hinduism.
Young India, 11-8-1920
2
ONE STEP ENOUGH FOR ME
Mr. Stokes is a Christian who wants to follow the light that
God gives him. He has adopted India as his home. He is
watching the non-cooperation movement from Kotagiri Hills
where he is living in isolation from the India of the plains and
is serving the hillmen. He has contributed three articles on
non-cooperation to the colunfins of The Servant of Calcutta and
other papers. I had the pleasure of reading them during my
Bengal tour. Mr. Stokes approves of non-cooperation, but
dreads the consequences that may follow complete success, i.e.,
evacuation of India by the British, He conjures up before his
mind a picture of India invaded by the Afghans from the North-
West, plundered by the Gurkhas from the HiUs. For me I say
with Cardinal Newman : ‘I do not ask to see the distant scene ;
one step enough for me.’ The movement is essentially religious.
The business of every god-fearing man is to dissociate himself
from evil in total disregard of consequences. He must have
faith in a good deed producing only a good result : that, in any
opinion, is the Gita doctrine of work without attachment. God
does not permit him to peep into the futxire. He follows truth
although the following of it may endanger his very life. He
Imows that it is better to die in the way of God than to live in
the way of Satan. Therefore, whoever is satisfied that this Gov-
ernment represents the. activity of Satan has no choice left to
him but to dissociate himself from it.
However, let us consider the worst that can happen to India
on a sudden evacuation of India by the British. What does it
matter that the Gurkhas and the Pathans attack us? Surely we
would be better able to deal with their violence than we are '
with the continued violence, moral and physical, perpetrated
- by the present Government. Mr. Stokes does not seem to eschew
the use of physical force. Surely, the combined labour of the
Rajput, the Sikh and the Mussalman warriors in a united India
may be trusted to deal with plunderers from any or all the^sides.
Imagine, however, the worst : Japan overwhelming us from the-
Bay of Bengal, the Gurkhas from the Hills, and the Pathans from
the North-West. If we do not succeed in driving them out, we
make terms with them, and drive them out at the first opportu-
ONE STEP ENOUGH FOB ME
5
nity. This will be a more manly course than a helpless sub-
mission to an admittedly wrongful State.
But I refuse to contemplate the dismal outlook. If the
movement succeeds through non-violent non-cooperation — and
that is the supposition Mr. Stokes has started with — the English,
whether they remain or retire, will do so as friends and under a
well-ordered agreement as between partners. I still believe in
the goodness of human nature, whether it is English or any
other. I therefore do not believe that the English will leave in
'a night’.
And do I consider the Gurkha and the Afghan being in-
corrigible thieves and robbers without ability to respond to
purifying influences ? I do not. If India returns to her spiri-
tuality, it will react upon the neighbouring tribes; she will in-
terest herself in the welfare of these hardy but poor people, and
even support them, if necessary, not out of fear but as a matter
of neighbourly duty. She will have dealt with Japan simulta-
neously with the British. Japan will not want to invade India,
if India has learnt to consider it a sin to use a single foreign
article that she can manufacture within her own borders. She
produces enough to eat, and her men and women can, without
difficulty, manufactinre enough cloth to cover their nakedness and
protect themselves from heat and cold. We become prey to in-
vasion, if we excite the greed of foreign nations by dealing with
them under a feeling of dependence on them. We must learn
to be independent of every one of them.
Whether, therefore, we Anally succeed through violence or
non-violence, in my opinion the prospect is by no means so
gloomy as Mr. Stokes has imagined. Any conceivable prospect
is, in my opinion, less black than the present unmanly and help-
less condition. And we cannot do better than following out,
fearlessly and with confidence, the open and honourable pro-
gramme of non-violence and sacrifice that we have mapped for
ourselves.
Young India, 29-12-1920
3
THE AFGHAN BOGEY
Tlae reader will find elsewhere a string of questions put by
a correspondent. The most important relates to a speech deliver-
ed by Maulana M^omed All on the fear of an Afghan invasion.
I have not read Maulana Mahomed All’s speech referred to by
the correspondent. But whether he does or not, I would, in a
sense, certainly assist the Amir of Afghanistan, if Tie v/aged war
against the British Government; That is to say, I would openly
tell my countrymen that it would be a crime to help a Gov-
ernment which had lost the confidence of the nation to remain
in power. On the other hand, I would not ask Indians to raise
levies for the Amir. That would be against the creed of non-
violence accepted by both Hindus and Muslims for the purpose
of the Khilafat, the Punjab and Swaraj. And I apprehend that
Maulana Mahomed Ali could not mean more in his speech than
what I have suggested. He could not very well do otherwise,
so long as the Hindu-Muslim compact subsists. The Muslims are
free to dissolve the compact. But it would be found upon an
examination of the case that the compact is indissoluble. Dis-
solution of the compact means destruction of India’s purpose.
I cannot conceive the present possibility of Hindus and Muslims
entering upon a joint armed revolt. And Muslims can hardly
expect to succeed with any plan of an armed revolt-
However, I warn the reader against believing in the bogey
of an Afghan invasion. Their own military writers have often
let us into the secret that many of the punitive expeditions v/ere
manufactured for giving the soldiers a training or keeping idle
armed men occupied. A weak, disarmed, helpless, credulous
India does not know how this Government has kept her under
its hypnotic spell. Even some of the best of us today really be-
lieve that the military budget is being piled up for protecting
India against foreign aggression. I suggest that it is being piled
up for want of faith in the Sikhs, the Gurkhas, the Pathans and
the Rajputs, i.e., for want of faith in us and for the purpose of
keeping us under forced subjection. My belief (I write under
correction) is that the anxiety of the Government alv/ays to
have a treaty with the Amir was based, not so much upon the
fear of a Russian invasion as upon the fear of losing the confi-
THE AFGHAN BCXJEY
7
dence of the Indian soldiery. Today there is certainly no fear
of a Russian invasion, I have never believed in the Bolshevik
menace. And why should any Indian Government, to use the ^
favourite phrase of the erstwhile idol of Bengal, “broad-based
upon a people’s affection”, fear Russia, Bolshevik or any
menace?^ Surely a contented and powerful India (all the more),
in alliance with Great Britain, can any day meet any invasion
upon her. But this Government has deliberately emasculated
us, kept us under the perpetual fear of our neighbours and the
whole world, and drained India of her splendid resources, so
that she has lost faith in herself either for defence or for dealing
with the simple problem of the growing poverty. I therefore
do certainly hope that the Amir will not enter into any treaty
with this Government. Any such treaty can only mean unholy
bargain against Islam and India. This Government being un-
willing to part with O’Dwyerism as an ‘emergency’ measure,
being unwilling to keep its faith with the Muslims (I must de-
cline to treat the Government of India separately from the
Imperial Government), and being unwilling to let India rise
to her full heiglit, wants Afghanistan to enter into a treaty of
offence against India. I hppe that there is but one opinion
so ‘far as non-cooperators are concerned* Whilst unwilling our-
selves, we cannot wish others to cooperate with the Govern-
ment.
Young India, 4-5-1921
4
OUR NEIGHBOURS
Is not my article oh ‘The Afghan Bogey’ an invitation to
the Afghans to invade the Indian border, and thus do I not be-
come a direct party to violence? Thus asks Mr. Andrews. My
article was written for Indians and for the Government. I do
not believe the Afghans to be so foolish as to invade India on
the strength of my article. But I see that it is capable of bearing
the interpretation put upon it by Mr. Andrews. * I therefore
hasten to inform all whom it may concern that not only do I
not want to invite the Afghans or anybody to come to our
assistance, but am anxious for them not to come to our assistance. .
I am quite confident of India’s ability to settle with the Gov-
ernment vdthout extraneous help. Moreover, I am interested
in demonstrating the perfect possibility of attaining our end
only by non-violent means. I would therefore strain every
nerve to keep the Afghans out of the Indian border. But my
anxiety to keep them off the Indian border will not go so far as
to assist the Government with men or money.
In my article I have put my position as clearly as possible.
For me the existing Government is the most intolerable of all,
it is the greatest danger to the manhood of India, and I would
welcome its re-formation at any cost. It is my settled convic-
tion that it is a godless Government. That there are good Eng-
lishmen and good Indians connected with it makes it all the
more dangerous for India. It keeps the nation’s eyes off the
inherent evil of it. My attack is not against individuals, it is
directed against the system, against the aggregate called the
Government. The best of Viceroys have been powerless to
eradicate the poison of the system. The poison is its foundation.
Therefore I can reconcile myself to all the worst that can hap-
pen to India in the place of the present system.
What, however, I would do is totally different from what I
can do. I am sorry to have to confess that the movement has
not yet acquired such hold on the soldier class as to embolden
them to refuse assistance to the Government in time of need.
When the soldier class has realized that they live for the nation,
and that it is a travesty of a soldier’s calling when he under-
OUR NEIGHBOURS
9
takes to kill to order, the battle of India’s worldly freedom is
won. As it is, the Indian soldier is as much subject
to fear as the layman. He fills the recruiting ranks because
he believes that there is no other means of livelihood. The
Government has made the profession of killing attractive by a
system of special rewards, and by a system of skilfully devised
punishments has made it well-nigh impossible for the soldier,
once he is in, to get out without difficulty. In these circumstan-
ces I do not delude myself with the belief that the British Gov-
ernment will be without Indian help in the event of an imme-
diate Afghan invasion. But it was my duty, especially when
challenged, to ^ut before the nation the position logically arising
from non-cooperation. It was necessary, too, to warn the nation
against being frightened by the Afghan bogey.
The second part of the question contains, in my opinion, a
misconception of non-violence. It is no part of the duty of a
non-violent non-cbope*rator to assist the Government against
war made upon it by others. A non-violent non-cooperator may
not secretly or openly encourage or assist any such war. He
may not take part directly or indirectly in it. But it is no part
of his duty to help the Government to end the war. On the
contrary, his prayer would be, as it must be, for the defeat of
a power which he seeks to destroy. I therefore, so far as my
creed of non-violence is concerned, can contemplate an Afghan
invasion with perfect equanimity, and equally so far as India’s
safety is concerned. The Afghans have no quarrel with India.
They are a god-fearing people. I warn non-cooperators against
judging the Afghans by the few savage specimens we see in
Bombay or Calcutta. It is a superstition to suppose that they
will overrun India if the British post at the frontier is with-
drawn. Let us remember that there is nothing to prevent them
from overrunning India today, if they wished to. But they are
as fond of their country as we claim to be fond of ours. I must
devote a separate article to an examination of the. difficult pro-
blem that faces the residents near the Frontier.
Young India, 18-5-1921
5
THE FROITTIER FRIENDS
The Punjabis living on the Frontier deserve the sympathy
of the whole of India. They are exposed to attacks from the
neighbouring tribes, they are defenceless, and, from all the
accounts received by me, the Government seem to give them
little or no protection, and nowadays the rule for the officers,
if anyone complains, is to refer the complainant to the Ali
Brothers and to me- If we had charge of Frontier, I know what
we would have done. We would certainly have died in the
attempt to defend the imarmed population of the districts. We
would have, if necessary, arm^ the population for self-defence.
But what is more, we , would have won over the tribesmen and
turned them from marauding bands into trustworthy neigh-
boiurs. But we have to take things as they are. I assume that
the Hindus and the Mussahnans are friendly to one another,
and that no Mussahnan traitorously helps the tribesmen against
his Hindu brother. The Mussalman population this side of the
l^ontier is in an exceptionally strong position to help.
We must not despair of the tribesmen. We have too often
considered them to be hopeless. In my opinion they are amen-
able to reason. They are god-fearing. They do not loot merely
for pleasure. I believe that they are themselves coming under
the influence of the wave of self-purification that is spreading.
I know that the process of reforming the tribesmen is slow
and tedious. It provides poor comfort to those that are robbed
of their possessions or their dear ones.
The difficulty is to be traced to the same cause- We fear
Englishmen, and v/e have become slaves. We fear the tribes-
men, and .we are satisfied with our slavery; we are thankful that
we are protected by the former against the latter. I cannot
imagine greater humiliation for a self-respecting man to be de-
pendent, for the safety of himself or his family, on those who he
thinks prey upon him. I would prefer total destruction of
myself and my all to purchasing safety at the cost of my man-
hood. This feeling of helplessness in us has really arisen from
our deliberate dismissal of God from our common affairs. We
have become atheists for all practical purposes. And therefore
THE FRONTIER FRIENDS
11
we believe that in the long run we must rely upon physical force
for our protection. In the face of physical danger we cast all
our philosophy to the winds. Our daily life is a negation of
God. If then we would but have a little trust in God, i.e. our-
selves, we shall find no difficulty with the tribesmen. Only in
that case we will have to be prepared at times to surrender our
possessions and imder certain circumstances our lives rather
than our honour. We must refuse to believe that our neigh-
bours are savages incapable of responding to the finer in man.
Thus consistently with ovu self-respect there are but two
courses open to us, to, prepare, in so far as we wish to defend
ourselves, however weakly, against robbery and plunder, or to
believe in the capacity of our neighbours to respond to the
nobler 'Instinct in man and to endeavour to reform the tribes-
men. I apprehend that the two processes will go hand in hand.
We must avoid the third at any cost, i.e. reliance in the British
bullet to protect us from harm. It is the surest way to national
suicide.
If my writings can reach the tribesmen, I would certainly
urge them to leave their predatory habits. Inasmuch as they
loot a single man or woman, they belie the teaching of the Pro-
phet whose name they prize above all others and whom they
believe to be the messenger of the God of mercy and justice. It
is the duty of every Mussalman and Ulema who has any influ-
ence with these simple men to tell them that, if they will play
their part in defending Islam from impending danger, the least
they can do is to refrain from molesting their neighbours, who
have done hot only no harm to them but who, whether they are
Hindus or Mussalmans, are doing their best to safeguard the
honoiur of Islam.
Young India, 25-5-1921
6
THE AFGHAN ALARM
It must be a matter of surprise to many people, as it is to .
me, that Shri Bipin Chandra Pal should be alarmed at- the
Afghan cry raised in interested quarters. He is a believer in
full Swaraj, and I venture to suggest to him that we cannot
estabhsh Swaraj in India till we rid ourselves of the feeling
of helplessness. Swaraj means our preparedness to deal with
the Afghan and every other menace in our country. The whole
scheme of non-cooperation is based on trusting other people
and if they prove untrustworthy, on our being prepared to meet
their deceit by self-suffering. I remind Shri Pal of what he
truly said at Allahabad at the Hindu-Muslim Conference in
reply 1o Dr. Sapru, that the same power of combination, re-
sourcefulness and suffering that would end the present system
of slavery, would enable us to deal with every other system of
a similar nature.
Pan-Islamism, which Shri Pal fears, is an admirable doctrine
in so far as a Mussahnan wishes the solidarity of all Muslim
States. It would be a dangerous doctrine, if it were to mean
a combination of Islamic powers for the purpose of exploiting
the world or converting it to Islam by force. No sane Mussal-
man of my acquaintance has ever entertained the latter idea.
The world is growing sick of the domination of brute force.
1 assure Shri Pal that I do not believe in flirtation with any
sentiment. I reject those that are bad, and hug those that are
good. I do not believe that serious Mussalmans will welcome
Afghan rule any more than serious Hindus would- In wnriting
my article on the Afghan Bogey, 1 was minded only to defend
the correct position of a comrade, and to warn India against
being frightened by the interested cry.
I totally dissent from Shri Pahs view that the event of an
Afghan invasion, or even the mere circulation of a rumoiu* of
such invasion, will incite a very large part of our Muslim popu-
lation to lawlessness, if not to open ‘revolt’. On the contrary,
it is my firm belief that the Mussalmans have too much at stake
today — ^the honour of their religion — to do any such foolish act.
As Maulana Shaukat Ali has said so often, the Mussalmans are
THE AFGHAN ALARM
13
too shrewd to mix up violence with non-violence. Shri Pal
has done a grave injustice to the Hindus by attributing to ‘a
very large proportion’ of Hindus ‘a desire to settle their own
account with the Mussalmans’. He has, I venture to assure him,
entirely misread the Hindu mind. The Hindus are as much in
earnest about the cow, as the Mussalmans about the Khilafat.
And the former know that they cannot save the cow — ^the
cherished dream of every Hindu — without the goodwill of the
latter, I promise that the Hindus will forget every wrong done
in the past by every Mussalman when the latter help them to
save the cow, as I know every Mussalman will feel eternally
grateful to the Hindus, if he finds that he has retrieved the
honour of Islam by their voluntary aid.
I deny in toto the tfuth of the proposition laid down by
Shri Pal that Muslims and Hindus would welcome an Afghan
invasion. The protests that have been made against the sup-
posed intentions of Maulana Mahomed Ali are surely enough
to convince anybody that India will not tolerate an Afghan in-
vasion.
Shri Pal suggests that, if the Amir invades and if we do not
aid the Government, there can only be a revolution. I venture
to suggest another alternative. If India as a non-cooperating
India does not assist, the Government will make terms with the
people. I do not consider the British people to be so utterly
devoid of commonsense or resourcefulness as to leave India
rather than come to terms with her and heal the Khilafat and
the Punjab woimds. That India does not yet possess the power
to command attention, I know only too well. I have simply
suggested a contingent alternative.
Shri Pal sees a difference between Lalaji’s and my declara-
tion at Simla and our previous declarations. I know none —
neither Lalaji nor I — has ever welcomed an Afghan invasion.
But I gladly lay down my own position in categorical terms: —
1. I do not believe that the Afghans want to invade India.
2. I believe that the Government is fully prepared to meet
an Afghan invasion.
3. I am sorry to confess that, if there were an Afghan in-
vasion, every Raja and Maharaja would render ^unconditional
assistance to the Government.
14
NON-VIOMarCE in peace and war
4. I believe too that we as a people are still so' demoralized,
diffident, and distrustful of Afghan intentions, and Hindus and
Mussalmans of one another, that many would, in mere panic,
rush to the help of the Government, and thus still further
strengthen the chainr,that binds India.
5. In theory, it is possible to distinguish between an in-
vasion of India and an invasion of the British Government for
the purpose of the Khilafat. In practice, I do not believe in the
Afghans invading India to embarrass the Government, and being
able, in the event of being successful, to resist the temptation
of establishing a kingdom in India.
6. In spite of such behef, I hold it to be contrary to the
faith of a non-cooperator to render unconditional assistance
to a Government which he seeks to end or mend.
7. A handful of conscientious objectors may make no im-
pression on the then current of events, but they will sow the
seed for raising a manly India.
8. I would rather see India perish at the hands of Afghans
than purchase freedom from Afghan invasion at the cost of her
honour. To have India defended by an unrepentant- Govern-
ment that keeps the Khilafat and the Punjab woimds still bleed-
ing, is to sell India’s honour.
9. My faith, however, in the British nation is such that,
when we have shown sufficient strength of prcrpose and under-
gone enough measure of self-sacrifice, the British people will
respond fully. My reading of history is that they do not yield
to justice pure and simple. It is too abstract for their ‘com-
monsense’. But they are far-seeing enough to respond to justice
when it is allied with force. Whether it is brute force or soul
force they do not mind-
10. It is the duty o'f every non-cooperator to let the Afghan
know that he believes in the capacity of non-cooperation to re-
store the Khilafat to the pre-war status, and that India does not
want their armed intervention, that non-cooperators would ap-
preciate their refusal to enter into any deal with the British
Government for holding India in subjection, and that India has
none but the friendliest feelings for her neighbours.
Young India, 1-6-1921
7
FOREIGN POLICY
The draft resolution on foreign policy approved and cir-
culated by the Working Committee has created a mild sensa-
tion. That some people are surprised at the Working Com-
mittee seriously discussing the question shows that in their
opinion India is not ripe for Swaraj. I have endeavoured to
show before now that everybody and every nation is always ripe
for Swaraj, or to put it another way, no nation needs to imdergo
tutelage at the hands of another. Indeed, whilst we are matur-
ing our plans for establishing Swaraj, we are bound to con-
sider and define our foreign policy. Surely we are bound autho-
ritatively to tell the world what relations we wish to cultivate
with it. If we do not fear our neighbours, or if although feeling
strong we have no designs upon them, we must say so. We are
equally bound to tell the world whether we want to send our
sepoys to the battle-fields of France or Mesopotamia. We must
not be afraid to speak our minds on all that concerns the nation.
A correspondent from Ludhiana has sent me a string of
questions, showing how the public mind is agitated. I give them
below with my answers.
1. Shall India’s foreign policy be govOmed by any other
consideration but that of its population?
t
Naturally the interest of India must be given preference
over all others.
2- Should Indian men or money be used for fighting the
battle of England etc. ?
Yes, if India has entered into treaty obligations to fight for
other nations.
\ 3. Shall the law of the land be subordinate to the special
interest of any sect, league or society?
Certainly not. But the law may be such as to provide
assistance to friendly neighboms, as we would, if we were free
today, be assisting the Turks with men and money to the best
of our ability. ' _ _
4. Should any Government be made a tool for the protec-
tion of any religion, race or class ?
16
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
The Swaraj Government to be worth the name will cer-
tainly protect the religions professed in India and the races
domiciled in India.
5. How are the things to be settled when Shastra or Shariat
says one thing and the country’s need is against it?
The question is really irrelevant. The need of one sect or
the religion professed by it must be the need of the country.
6. Should the relations between the zamindars and the
ryots be based on mutiny?
I hope they never will be so based under Swaraj, but then
they will be happy and mutually beneficial.
7. Should loyalty to one’s motherland be conditional, and
if so how?
Loyalty to the coimtry is always . subordinate to loyalty to
God.
Young India, 20-10-1921
SOLDIERS
The prosecution of the Brothers and their companions and
the manifesto havq reached the barracks, and soldiers are in-
quiring how they can support themselves if they leave. One
correspondent asks on their behalf as to what would happen to
them under Swaraj. As for the first, the Working Committee
has shown them the way. Every soldier can easily become a
weaver and carder. Carding requires strength of arm which
every soldier must have. And a carder in Bombay earns^any-
thing between two to three rupees per day. Many weavers of
the Punjab have left the handloom for the sword of the hire-
ling. I consider the former to be infinitely preferable to the
latter. I refuse to call the profession of the sepoy honourable
when he has no choice as to the time when and the persons or
people against whom he is called upon to use his sword. The
sepoy’s services have more often been utilized for enslaving uS
than for protecting us, whereas the weaver today can truly be-
come the liberator of his country and hence a true soldier.
HINDUS IN AEX3HANISTAN
17
A friend has suggested that agriculture should also be added
to weaving and carding advised by the Congress. It cannot be
as an immediate measure, because agricultmre cannot be taken
up with ease, and it requires a capital outlay which renders it .
impracticable for our purpose.
What will happen during Swaraj is easily answered. The
soldiers will not then be hirelings, but they will form the na-
tional militia for defensive and protective purposes alone. They
will have a voice in the moulding of the affairs of the nation.
And they will certainly never be sent to cut down inoffensive
Turks or Arabs in the West or equally inoffensive Chinese or
Burmese in the East.
Young India, 27-10-1921
9
t
HINDUS IN AFGHANISTAN
To the Editor, Young India.
Sir,
If an insignificant Indian, who does not .believe in the
attainment of Swaraj 'hj non-cooperation and who thinks that
^ the Klhilafat agitation is strengthening the hands of those who,.
; in their heart of hearts, are preparing for the ^restoration of
r Muslim rule, far more despotic and iniquitous than the present
; ‘‘Satanic” Government, if such an -Indian, who loves his country
^ in his own way, deserves any attention, then may I make the
.5 following enquiry?
t I read in Bellow’s Journal of a Political Mission to
;; Afghanistan that the Hindkis, i.e., Hindus of Afghanistan were
‘X subject to niany indignities and iniquitous disabilities; for ex-
;r ample, they had to pay the “jaziya”, they must wear a distinct-
ive dress, they must not ride a horse upon a saddle, etc. These
Xi things were, of course, sanctioned by the Muslim Government
X of Afghanistan. I am not aware of any change for the better
p since. You have many friends, Khilafatwalas, who have openly
X declared in favour of an Afghan invasion of India; will you in-
V form the Hindus, if the legal disabilities of the Hindus of
Afghanistan have been removed ? If not, should you not plead
18
NON-VIOLENCK IN PEACE AND WAR
for their removal as strongly as you are doing in the case of the
so-called “slave-like” treatment of Indians by the “Satanic”
Government? The race to which this “Satanic” Government be-
longs never treated Indians so unfairly as the Muslim rulers of
Afghanistan did the Hindus.
I believe that you are doing greater good by your strong
attitude regarding untouchabihty than by your support of the
Khilafat. If you can remove untouchability and the provincial
differences among Hindus, you will become one of the greatest
benefactors of humanity. The Muslims are strong enough to
take care of themselves.
Eatanganj I am, etc.
24-10-1921 R. C. BANERJEE
[I do not know anything about the treatment of Hindus in
Afghanistan, but I am prepared for the moment to assume the
truth of the statement referred to by the correspondent. It
would be relevant, if we were trying do introduce Afghan rule
in India. I am only concerned with the present misrule in
India, which, if it permits me to ride a horse, has reduced me to
serfdom in my own country. Nor can I be deterred from over-
throwing the present misrule for fear of Afghan or other
Muslim rule creeping in. The correspondent will find that when
we have attained Swaraj we shall have attained the ability to
resist any other misrule. We shall have learnt, without the
necessity of training at Sandhvust, the art of dying for country
and religion. M- K. G.]
Young India, 3-11-1921
10
MY PART IN THE WAR
On arrival in England I learned that Gokhale had been
stranded in Paris where he had gone for reasons of health, and
as communication between Paris and London had been cut off,
there was no knowing when he would return. I did not want
to go home without having seen him, but no one could say de-
finitely when he would arrive.
What then was I to do in the meanwhile? What was my
duty as regards the war? Sorabji Adajania, my comrade in
jail and a satyagrahi, was then reading for the bar in London.
As one of the best satyagrahis he had been sent to England to
qualify himself as a barrister, so that he might take my place
on return to South Africa. Dr. Pranjivandas Mehta was paying
his expenses. With him, and through him; I had conferences
with Dr. Jivraj Mehta and others who were prosecuting their
studies in England. In consultation with them a meeting of
the Indian residents in Great Britain and Ireland was called.
I placed my views before them.
I felt that Indians residing in England ought to do their bit
in the war. English students had volunteered to serve in the
army, and Indians might do no less. A number of objections
were taken to this line of argument. There was, it was con-
tended, a world of difference between the Indians and the Eng-
lish. We were slaves and they were masters. How could a
slave co-operate with a master in the hour of the latter’s need?
Was it not the duty of the slave, seeking to be free, to make the
master’s need his opportunity? This argument failed to appeal
to me then. I knew the difference of status between an Indian
and an Englishman, 'but I did not believe that we have been
quite reduced to slavery. I felt then that it was more the fault
of individual British officials than of the British system, and that
we could convert them by love. If we would improve our status
through the help and co-operation of the British, it was our
duty to win their help by standing by them in their hour of need.
Though the system was faulty, it did not seem to me to be intole-
rable, as it does today. But if, having lost my faith in the system,
I refuse to co-operate with the British Government today, how
20
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAE
could those friends then do so, having lost their faith not only
in the system but in the officials as well ?
The opposing friends felt that that was the hour for making
a bold declaration of Indian demands and for improving the
status of Indians.
I thought that England’s need should not be turned into our
opportunity, and that it was more becoming and far-sighted not
to press our demands while the war lasted. I therefore adhered
to my advice and invited those who would to enlist as volun-
teers. There was a good response, practically all the provinces
and all the religions being represented among the volunteers.
I wrote a letter to Lord Crewe, acquainting him with these
facts, and expressing our readiness to be trained for ambulance
work, if that should be considered a condition precedent to the
acceptance of our offer.
Lord Crewe accepted the offer after some hesitation, and
thanked us for having tendered our services^to the Empire at
that critical hour.
The volunteers began their preliminary training in first aid
to the wounded under the well-known Dr, Cantlie. It was a
short course of six weeks, but it covered the whole course of
first aid.
We were a class of about 80- In six weeks we were examin-
ed, and all except one passed. For these the Government now
provided military drill and other training. Colonel Baker was
placed in the charge of this work.
London in these days was a sight worth seeing. There was
no panic, but all were busy helping to the best of their ability.
Able-bodied adults began training as combatants, but what were
the old, the infirm and the women to do? There was enough
work for them, if they wanted. So they employed themselves in
cutting and making clothes and dressings for the wounded.
The Lyceum, a ladies’ club, undertook to make as many
clothes for the soldiers as they could. Shrimati Sarojini Naidu
was a member of this club, and threw herself wholeheartedly
into the work. This was my first acquaintance with her. She
placed before me a heap of clothes which had been cut to pattern,
and asked me to get them all sewn up and return them to her.
WHY DID I ASSIST IN THE LAST WAR ?
21
I welcomed her demand, and with the assistance of friends got
as many clothes made as I could manage during my training for
first aid.
{Autobiography, Part IV, Chap. 38)
11
WHY DID I ASSIST IN THE LAST WAR ?
A correspondent asks some pertinent questions in the fol-
lowing pungent fashion:
“When the Zulus broke out for liberty against the British
usurpers, you helped the British in suppressing the so-called
rebellion. Is it a rebellion to try to shake off the foreign yoke?
Was Jean D’arc a rebel? Was George Washington a rebel? Is
De Valera one? You may say that the Zulus had recourse to
violence. I then ask, was the end bad or the means? The latter
may have been so, but certainly not the former; so you will be
kind enough to explain the riddle. In the last war, v/hen the
gallant Germans and Austrians were fighting so bravely against
a world combination, you raised recruits for the British to fight
against the nations that had done India no harm. Whenever
there is a war between two races, one has to hear both parties
before coming to a decision either for or against any of them.
In the last war we had a one-sided version only, and that from
a nation certainly not renowned for truthfulness or honesty.
You have all along been an advocate of passive resistance and
non-violence. Why then did you induce people to take part in a
war the merits of which they knew not, and for the aggran-
disement of a race so miserably wallowing in the mire of impe-
rialism? You may say you had faith in the British bureaucracy.
Is it possible for any person to have faith in an alien people,
all whose acts have run so glaringly counter to their promises?
It cannot have been so with a person of such high attainments
as yourself. So you wiU please answer the second riddle.
“There is another point to which I should like to refer. You
are an advocate of non-violei\ce. Under the present circum-
stances we should be strictly non-violent. But when India will
be free, should we strictly eschew arms even if a foreign nation
invaded us? Would you also boycott railways and telegraphs
and steamers even when they will have ceased to promote *
exports of the products of our soil?"
I hear and read many charges of inconsistency about
myself. But I do not answer them as they do not-affect anyone
22
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
but myself. The questions, however, raised by the correspon-
dent are of general importance and deserve notice. They are
by no means new to me. But I do not remember having answer-
ed them in the columns of Young India.
Not only did I offer my services at the time of the Zulu Re-
volt but before that, at the time of the Boer War, and not only
did I raise recruits in India during the late war, but I raised an
ambulance corps in 1914 in London. If, therefore, I have sinned,
the cup of my sins is fiiU^to the brim. I lost no occasion of
serving the Government at all times. Two questions presented
themselves to me during aU those crises. What was my duty
as "a citizen of the empire as I then believed myself to be, and
v/hat was my duty as an out-and-out believer in the religion of
ahimsa — ^non-violence?
I know now that I was wrong in thinking that I was a
citizen of the empire. But on those four occasions I did honestly
believe that, in spite of the many disabilities that my country
was labouring under, it was making its way towards freedom,
and that on the whole the government from the popular stand-
point was not wholly bad, and that the British administrators
were honest though insular and dense. Holding that view, I
set about doing what an ordinary Englishman would do in the
circumstances. I was not wise or important enough to take in-
dependent action. I had no business to judge or scrutinize
ministerial decisions with the solemnity of a tribunal. I
did not impute malice to the ministers either at the time ci
the Boer War, the Zulu Revolt or the late war. I did not ^con-
sider Englishmen, nor do I now consider them, as particular!}"
bad or worse than other human beings, I considered and still
consider them to be as capable of high motives and actions as
any other body of men, and equally capable of making mistakes.
I therefore felt that I sufficiently discharged my duty as a man
and a citizen by offering my humble services to the empire in
the hour of its need whether local or general. That is how I
would expect every Indian' to act by his country under Swaraj.
I should be deeply distressed, if on every conceivable occasion
every one of us were to be a law unto oneself and to scrutinize
in golden scales every action of our future National Assembly.
I would surrender my judgment in most matters to national re-
presentatives, taking particular care in making my choice of
WHY DID I ASSIST IN THE LAST WAR ^
23
such representatives, I know that in no other manner would a
democratic government be possible for one single day.
The whole ^situation is now changed for me. My eyes, I
fancy, are opened. Experience has made me wiser. I consider
the existing system of government to be wholly bad and requir-
ing special national effort to end or mend it. It does not possess
within itself any capacity for self-improvement. That I still be-
lieve many English administrators to be honest does not assist
me, because I consider them to be as blind and deluded as I was
myself. Therefore I can take no pride in calling the empire mine
or describing myself as a citizen. On the contrary, I fully real-
ize that J am a paHah imtouchable of the empire. I must, there-
fore, constantly pray for its radical reconstruction or total des-
truction, even as a Hindu pariah would be fully justified in so
praying about Hinduism or Hindu society.
The next point, that of ahimsa^ is more abstruse. My con-
ception of ahimsa impels me always to dissociate myself from
almost every one of the activities I am engaged in. My soul
refuses to be satisfied so long as it is a helpless witness of a
single wrong or a single misery. But it is not possible for me —
a weak, frail, miserable being — to mend every wrong or to hold
myself free of blame for all the wrong I see. The spirit in me
pulls one way, the flesh in me pulls in the opposite direction!
There is freedom from the action of these two forces, but that
freedom is attainable only by slow and painful stages. I can
attain freedom not by a mechanical refusal to act, but only by
intelligent action in a detached manrier. This struggle resolves
itself into an incessant crucifixion of the flesh so that the spirit
may become entirely free.
I was, again, an ordinary citizen no wiser than my fellows^
myself believing in ahimsa and the rest not believing in it at
all but refusing to do their duty of assisting the Government be-
cause they were actuated by anger and malice. They were re-
fusing out of their ignorance and weakness. As a fellow worker
- it became my duty to guide them aright. I therefore placed be-
fore them their clear duty, explained the doctrine of ahimsa to
them, and let them make their choice, which they did. I do not
repent of my action in terms of ahimsa. For, imder Swaraj too
I would not hesitate to advise those who would bear arms to do-
so and fight for the country.
24
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
That brings to me the second question. Under Swaraj of
my dream there is no necessity for arms at all. But I do not
expect that dream to materialize in its fulness as a result of the
present effort, first because the effort is not directed to that end
as an immediate goal, and secondly because I do not consider
myself advanced enough to be able to prescribe a detailed course
of conduct to the nation for such preparation. I am stiU myself
too full of passion and other frailties of human nature to feel
the call or the capacity. All I claim, ior myself is that I am in-
cessantly trying to overcome every one of my weaknesses. I
have attained great capacity, I believe,- for suppressing and
curbing my senses, but I have not become incapable of sin, i.e.,
of being acted upon by my senses. I believe it to be possible
for every human being to attain that blessed and indescribable
sinless state in which he feels within himself the presence of
God to the exclusion of everything else- It is, I must confess,
as yet a distant scene. And therefore it is not possible for me
to show the nation a present way to complete non-violence in
practice.
Young India, 17-11-1921
12
HOW THE HOPE WAS SHATTERED*
«
My public life began in 1893 in South Africa in troubled
weather. My first contact with British authorities in , that
country was not of a happy character. I discovered that as a
man and an Indian I had no rights. More correctly, I discovered
that I had no rights as a man because I was an Indian.
But I was not baffled. I thought that this treatment of
Indians was an excrescence upon a system that was intrinsically
and mainly good. I gave the Government my voluntary and
hearty co-operation, criticizing it freely where I felt it was
faulty but never wishing its destruction.
Consequently when the existence of the Empire was threat-
ened in 1899 by the Boer challenge, I offered my services to it,
* From the statement made by Gandhi ji before the court at his trial on
18-3-1922.
HOW THE HOPE WAS SHATTERED
25
raised a voluntary ambulance corps, and served at several actions
that took place for the relief of Ladysmith. Similarly in 1906
at the time of the Zulu Revolt I raised a stretcher-bearer party
and served till the end of the ‘rebellion’. On both* these occa-
sions I received medals and was even mentioned in despatches.
For my v/ork in South Africa I was given by Lord Hardinge a
Kaiser-i-Hind Gold Medal. When the war broke out in 1914
between England and Germany, I raised a volunteer ambulance
corps in London, consisting of the then resident Indians in
London, chiefly students. Its work was acknowledged by the
authorities' to be valuable. Lastly, in India when a special appeal
was made at the War Conference in Delhi in 1918 by Lord
Chelmsford for recruits, I struggled, at the cost of my health,
to raise a corps in Kheda, and the response was being made
when the hostilities ceased and orders were received that no
more recruits were wanted- In all these efforts at service I was
actuated by the belief that it is possible by such services to
gain a status of full equality in the Empire for my country-
men.
The first shock came in the shape of the Rowlatt Act, a
law designed to rob the people of all real freedom. I felt called
upon to lead an intensive agitation against it. Then followed
the Punjab horrors beginning with the massacre at Jallianwala
Bagh,and culminating in crawling orders, public floggings and
other indescribable humiliations. I discovered too that the
plighted word of the Prime Minister to the Mussalmans of India
regarding the integrity of Turkey and the holy places of Islam
was not likely to be fulfilled. But, in spite of the forebodings
and the grave warnings of friends, at the Amritsar Congress in
1919 I fought for co-operation and working the Montagu-
Chelmsford reforms, hoping that the Prime Minister would re-
deem his promise to the Indian Mussalmans, that the Punjab
wound would be healed, and that the reforms, inadequate and
unsatisfactory though they were, marked a new era of hope in
the life of India.
But all that hope was shattered. The IChilafat promise v/as
not to be redeemed. The Punjab crime was whitewashed, and
most culprits went not only unpunished but remained in service
and some continued to draw pensions from the Indian revenue,
and in some cases were even rewarded. I saw too that not only
26
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
did the reforms not mark a change of heart, but they were only
a method of further draining India of her wealth and of pro-
longing her servitude.
Young India, 23-3-1922
13
MY PATH
It is my good fortune and misfortune to receive attention in
Europe and America at the present moment. It is my good
fortune in that my message is being studied and understood in
the West. It is my misfortune in that it is also being either un-
consciously exaggerated or wilfully distorted. Every truth is
self-acting and possesses inherent strength. I therefore remain
unperturbed even when I find myself grossly misrepresented.
A kind European friend has sent me a warning which shows, if
the information given to him be true, that I am being either
wilfully or accidentally misunderstood in Russia. Here is the
message:
'*The Russian representative at Berlin, M. Krestiiisky, vrould
be asked by the Minister for Foreign Affairs to give an official
welcome to Gandhi (?) and to ‘profit by the situation to under-
take Bolshevik propagandist activities among his followers’.
Besides, Krestinsky would be given the task of inviting Gandhi
to come to Russia. He^i^-huthorized to give a subsidy for the
publication of propagandist literature among the'" oppressed
peoples of Asia; and he is to found, for the purposes of the
Oriental Club and Secretariate, a purse in the name of Gandhi,
for students who are of his ideas (of the ideas of Gandhi or of
those of Moscow?). Finally three Hindus would be enlisted in
this work. All this is published in the Russian newspapers like
the Rul of Oct. 18th.”
The message gives the clue to the reports that I was likely
to be invited to visit Germany and Russia. I need not say
that I have received no such invitation at' all, nor have I the
slightest desire to visit these great countries. I am conscious of
the fact that the truth for which I stand has not yet been fully
accepted by India. It has not yet been fully vindicated. My
work in India is still in the experimental stage. In such circum-
stances any foreign adventure on my part would be altogether
MY PATH
27
premature. I should be fully satisfied if the experiment de-
monstrably succeeds in India.
My path is clear. Any attempt to use me for violent pur-
poses is bound to fail. I have no secret methods. I know no
diplomacy save that of Truth. I have no weapon but non-
violence. I may be unconsciously led astray for a while but not
for all time- I have therefore well-defined limitations, within
which alone I may be used. Attempts have been made before
now to use me unlawfully more than once. They have failed
each time so far as I am aware.
I am yet ignorant of what exactly Bolshevism is. L have
not been able to study it. I do not know whether it is for the
good of Russia in the long run. - But I do know that in so
far as it is based on violence and denial of God, it repels me.
I do not believe in short — ^violent — cuts to success. Those Bol-
shevik friends who are bestowing their attention on me should
realize’ that, however much I may sympathize with and admire
worthy motives, I am an uncompromising opponent of violent
methods even to serve the noblest of causes. There is, there-
fore, really no meeting ground between the school of violence
and myself. But my creed of non-violence not only does not
preclude me but compels me even to associate with anarchists
and all those who believe in violence. But that association is
always with the sole object of^ weaning them from what appears
to me to be their error. For experience convinces me that per-
manent good can never be the outcome of untruth and violence.
Even if mi^ belief is a fond delusion, it will be admitted^that it
is a fascinating delusion.
28
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
14
UlTDER SWARAJ
“In your Swaraj is there any place for soldiers ? Will your
Swaraj Government keep armies? If so, will they fight— I
mean use physical force — when necessary, or will they ofter
satyagraha against their opponents ?”
Alas! In my Swaraj of today there is room for soldiers. Let
the revolutionary friend know that I have ^escribed the dis-
armament and consequent emasculation of a whole people as
the blackest crime of the British. I have not the capacity for
preaching universal non-violence to the country. I preach,
therefore, non-violence restricted strictly to the purpose of win-
ning our freedom and therefore perhaps for preaching the re-
gulation of international relations by non-violent means. But
my incapacity must not be mistaken for that of the doctrine of
non-violence. I see it with my intellect in all its effulgence. My
heart grasps it. But I have not yet the attainments of preach-
ing universal non-violence with effect. I am not advanced
enough for the great task. I have yet anger within me, I have
yet the clwaitahhava — duality — in me. I can regulate my pas-
sions, I keep them under subjection, but before I can preach
universal non-violence with effect, I must be wholly free from
passions. I must be wholly incapable of sin. Let the revolu-
tionary pray with and for me that I may soon become that. But
meanwhile let him take with me the one step to it which I see
as clearly as daylight, i.e, to win India’s freedom with strictly
non-violent means. And then under Swaraj you and I shall
liave a disciplined intelligent educated police force that would
keep order within and fight raiders from without, if by that time
I or someone else does not show a better way of dealing with
either.
. Young India, 7-5-1923
15
.WHAT OF THE WEST ?
A European friend thus writes: —
\
'*What can be done, what would you suggest that could be
tried, in favour of the starving millions of the West? By starv-
ing millions I mean the masses of the European and American
proletariat who are being driven to the abyss, who live a life
not worth the name, full of the direst" privations, who can
nourish no dream of future relief by any form of Swaraj, who
are perhaps more hopeless than the millions of India, because
the faith in God, the consolation of religion, has left them to
be replaced by nothing but hatred.
**The iron hands which press down the Indian nation are at
work there also. The devilish system is at work in each of
these masses who naturally try to escape the hell of their life -
at any cost, at the cost of making it a greater hell, and who have
no longer the outlet of religious hopes, as Christianity by siding
for centuries with the powerful and the greedy has lost all
credit.
'*Of course I expect Mahatma ji to answer that the only way
to salvation for these masses, if there, is any left, if the whole
Western world is not already doomed, lies in the application
of a disciplined non-violent resistance carried on, on a large
scale. But there are no traditions of ahimsa in the European
soil and mind. Even the spreading of the doctrine would en-
counter huge difficulties, what about its right understanding
and application!"
The problem underlying the question so sincerely put by
the friend lies outside my orbit. I therefore attempt an ans'wer
merely in courteous recognition of friendship between the ques-
tioner and myself. I confess that no- value attaches to my
answer, save what we attach to every considered argument, I
know neither the diagnosis of the European disease nor the re-
medy in the same sense that I claim to know both in the case
of India.
I, however, feel that fundamentally the disease is the same
in Europe as it is in India, in spite of the fact that in the former*
country the people enjoy political self-government. No mere
transference of political power in India will satisfy my ambition,
even though I hold such transference to be a vital necessity of
Indian national life. The peoples of Europe have no doubt
30
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
political power, but no Swaraj. Asian and African races are
exploited for their partial benefit, and they, on their part, are
being exploited by the ruling class or caste imder the sacred
name of democracy. At the root, therefore, the disease appears
to be the same as in India. The same remedy is, therefore,
likely to be applicable. Shorn of aU the camoufiage, the ex-
ploitation of the masses of Europe is sustained by. tdolence.
Violence on the part of the masses will never remove the
disease. Anyway, up to now experience shows that success of
violence has been short-lived. It has led to greater
violence. What has been tried hitherto has been a variety of
violence and artificial checks dependent mainly upon the will of
the violent. At the crucial moment these checks have naturally
broken down. It seems to me, therefore, that sooner or later
the Emopean masses ■will have to take to non-violence, if they
are to find their deliverance. That there is no hope of their
taking to it in a body and at once does not baffle me. A few
thousand years are but a speck in the vast time circle. Some-
one has to make a beginning with a faith that -will hot flinch.
I doubt not that the masses, even of Europe, will respond, but
what is more emergent in point of time is not so much a large
experiment in non-violence as a precise grasp of the meaning
of deliverance.
From what will the masses be delivered ? It will not do to
have a vague generalization and to answer: ‘from exploitation
and degradation’. Is not the answer this that they want to
occupy the status that capital does today ? If so, it can be
attained only by -violence. But if they want to shun the ewls
of capital, in other words, if they would revise the •viewpoint of
capital, then they would strive to attain a juster distribution of
the products of labour. This immediately takes us to content-
ment and simplicity, voluntarily adopted. Under the new out-
look multiplicity of material wants will not be the aim of life,
the aim will be rather their restriction consistently with comfort.
^We shall cease to think of getting what we can, but "we shall
decline to receive what aU cannot get. It occurs to me that it
ought not to be difficult to make a successful appeal to the
masses of Europe in terms of economics, and a fairly successful
working of such an experiment must lead to immense and un-
conscious spiritual results. I do not believe that the spiritual
TO AMERICAN FRIENDS
31
law works on a field of its own. On the contrary, it expresses
itself only through the ordinary activities of life. It thus affects
the economic, the social and the political fields. If the masses
of Europe can be persuaded to adopt the view I have suggested,
it will be found that violence will be wholly unnecessary to
attain the aim, and that they can easily come to their own by
following out the obvious corollaries of non-violence. It may
even be that what seems to me to be so natural and feasible
for India may take longer to permeate the inert Indian masses
than the active European masses. But I must reiterate my con-
fession that all my argument is based on suppositions and as-
sumptions and must, therefore, be taken for what it is worth.
Young India, 3-9-1925
16
TO AMERICAN FRIENDS
It is a privilege for me to enjoy the friendship of so many
unknown American and European friends. It pleases me to
note that the circle is ever widening, perhaps more especially in
America. I had the pleasure of receiving a warm invitation
about a year ago to visit that continent. The same invitation
has now been repeated with redoubled strength and with the
offer to pay all expenses. I was unable then, as I am now, to
respond to the kind invitation. To accept it is an easy enough
task, but' I must resist the temptation, for I feel that I can
make no effective appeal to the people of that great continent
unless I make my position good with the intellectuals of India.
I have not a shadow of doubt about the truth of my funda-
mental position. But I know that I am unable to carry v.uth
me the bulk of educated India. I can, therefore, gain no effect-
ive help for my country from the Americans and Europeans so
long as I remain isolated from educated India. I do want to
think in terms of the whole world. My, patriotism includes the
good of mankind in general. Therefore my service of India
includes the service of humanity. But I feel that I should be
going out of my orbit, if I left it for help from the West. I
must be satisfied for the time being with such help as I can
32
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
get from the West, speaking to it from my smaller Indian plat-
form. If I go to America or to Europe, I must go in my strength,
not in my weakness, which I feel today — the weakness, I mean,
of my country. For, the whole scheme for the liberation of
India is based upon the development of internal strength. It is
a plan of self-purification. The peoples of ^ the West, therefore,
can best help the Indian movement by setting apart specialists
to study the inwardness of it. Let the specialists come to India
with an open mind and in a spirit of humility as befits a searcher
after Truth. Then perhaps they will see the reality instead of a
glorified edition that, in spite of all my desires to be absolutely
truthful, I am likely to present if I go to America. I believe in
thought-power mqre than in the power of the word, whether
written or spoken. And if the movement that I seek to re-
present has vitality in it and has divine blessing upon it, it vnil
permeate the whole world without any physical presence in
its different parts. Anyway at the present moment I see no
light before me. I must patiently plod- in India xmtil I see my
way clear for going outside the Indian border.
After pressing the invitation, the American friend puts a
number of questions for my consideration. I welcome them and
gladly take the opportimity of answering them through these
columns. He says:
“Whether you decide, now or later, to come here or not to
come, I trust you will find the following questions worth con-
sidering. They have developed insistently in my mind for a
long time.”
His first question is:
“Has the time arrived — or is it coming — when your best
way to help India will he by moving the whole v;orld — and
especially England and America — to a new consciousness
I have partly answered the question already. , In my opinion
the time has not yet arrived — it may come any day — for me to ,
go out of India to move the whole world to new consciousness.
The process, however, is even now indirectly and unconsciously
going on though slowly. ^
“Are not the present-day interests of all mankind, every-
where, so inextricably interwoven that no single country like
India can be moved far out of its present relationships to the
others ?”
TO AMERICAN FRIENDS
33
I do believe with the writer that no single country can re-
main in isolation for any length of time. The present plan for
securing Swaraj is to attain not a position of isolation but one
of full self-realization and self-expression for the benefit of all.
The present position of bondage and helplessness hurts not only
India, not only England, but the whole world.
*Ts not your message and method essentially a world gospel
— which will find its power in responsive souls, here and there,
in many countries, who will thereby, gradually, remake the
world
If I can say so without arrogance and with due humility,
my message and methods are indeed, in tjieir essentials, for the
whole world, and it gives me keen satisfaction to know that it
has already received a wonderful response in the hearts of a
large and daily growing number of men and women of the
West.
“If you demonstrate your message in the language only of
the East and in terms only of Indian emergencies, is there not
grave danger that inessentials will be confused with funda-
mentals, that some features which correspond only to extreme
situations in India will be wrongly imderstood to be vital in the
universal sense ?”
I am alive to the danger pointed out by the writer, but it
seems to be inevitable. I am in the position of a scientist who
is in the midst of a very incomplete experiment and who, there-
fore, 'is unable to forecast large results and larger corollaries
in a language capable of being understood. In the experimental
stage, therefore,' I must run the risk of the experiment being
misunderstood, as it has been and probably still is in many
places.
“Ought you not to come to America (which, in spite of all
her faults, is perhaps, potentially, the most spiritual of all
living peoples) and tell the world what your message, means
in terms of Western, as well as Eastern, civilization?*'
People in general will understand my message through its
results. The shortest way, therefore, perhaps, of making it
effectively heard is to let it speak for itself, at any rate for the
time being.
‘Tor example, should the Western followers of your
inspiration preach and practise the spinning wheel?"
8
34
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
It is certainly not necessary for the Western people to preach
and practise the spinning wheel unless they will do so out of
sympathy, or for discipline, or with a view to applying their
matchless inventive faculty to making the spinning wheel a
better instrument while retaining its essential characteristic as
a cottage industry. But the message of the spinning wheel is
much wider than its circumference. Its message is one of simpli-
city, service of mankind, living so as not to hurt others, creating
an indissoluble bond between the rich and the poor, capital and
labour, the prince and the peasant. That larger message is
naturally for all.
“Is your condemnation of railroads, doctors, hospitals, and
other features of modern civilization essential and unalterable?
Should we not, first, try to develop a spirit great enough to
spiritualize the machinery and the organized, scientific and
productive powers of modern life?”
My condemnation of railroads etc., whilst true where it
stands, has little or no bearing on the present movement which
disregards none of the institutions mentioned by the writer.
In the present movement I am attacking neither railroads nor
hospitals; but in an ideal State they seem to me to have little
or no place. The present movement is just the attempt the
writer desires. Yet it is not an attempt to spiritualize the
machinery — ^because that seems to me an impossible task — but
to introduce, if it is at all possible, a human or the humane spirit
among the men behind the machinery. Organization of machi-
nery for the purpose of concentrating wealth and power in the
hands of a few and for the exploitation of many I hold to be
altogether wrong. Much of the organization of machinery of
the present age is of that type. The movement of the spinning
wheel is an organized attempt to displace machinery from that
state of exclusiveness and exploitation and to place it in its
proper state. Under my scheme, therefore, men in charge of
machinery will think not of themselves or even of the nation
to which they belong but of the whole human race. Thus Lanca-
shire men \vill cease to use their machinerj^ for exploiting
India and other countries, hut on the contrar>^ they wnll devise
means of enabling India to convert in her own \illages her
cotton into cloth. Nor will Americans, under my scheme, seek
to enrich themselves by exploiting the other races of the earth
through their inventive skill.
TO AMERICAN FRIENDS
85
'Ts It not possible, in conditions so favourable as America's,
to clarify and advance the ^volution of the best human con-
sciousness into such purpose and power, courage and beneficence,
as shall liberate the souls of India's millions, and of all men
everywhere?"
It is undoubtedly possible. Indeed it is my hope that
America will seek the evolution of the best human conscious-
ness; but that time is perhaps not yet. Probably it will not be
before India has foimd her own soul. Nothing will please me
more than to find America and Europe making the difilcult path
of India as easy as it 'is possible for them to do. They can do
so by withdrawing the temptations in India's way and by en-
couraging her in her attempt to revive her ancient industries in
her own villages.
"V/hy is it that people like myself, in every country, are
grateful to you and eager to follow you? Is it not for two
reasons, chiefly:
First: Because the next and basic need throughout the world
is for a new spiritual consciousness — a realization, in the
thought and feeling of average people, of the equal divinity
of all human beings, and the unity, brotherhood, of all?
Second: Because you, more than any other widely known
man, have this consciousness, together with the power to arouse
it in others?”
I can only hope that the writer’s estimate is true.
"It is a world need — is it not? — ^to which you have the best
answer that God has vouchsafed to man. How can your mission
be fulfilled in India alone? If my arm or leg could be vitalized
to an extent far beyond the balance of my body, would that
make for my general health, or even for the permanent best
good of the one favoured member?”
I am fully aware that my mission cannot be fulfilled in India
alone, but I hope I am humble enough to recognize my limita-
tibns and to see that I must keep for the time being to my
restricted Indian platform till I know the result of the experi-
ment in India itself. As I have already replied, I should like to
see India free and strong so that she may offer herself as a
v/illing and pure sacrifice for the betterment of the world. The
individual, being pure, sacrifices himself for the family, the
latter for. the village, the village for the district, the district
for the province, the province for the nation, the nation for alh
36
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
I even submit— vrith deep reverence for your message
that possibly 5 ’our own vision and inspiration would benefit
by adjustment to the world instead of only, or chiefly, to India?”
I recognize the considerable force of the foregoing^ state-
ment- It is not at all impossible that a visit to the West may
give me not a wider outlook— for I have endeavoured to show
that it is the widest possible— but it may enable me to discover
new methods of realizing the outlook. If such is my need,
God will open the way for me.
“Is the political form of government, in India or anywhere,
so important as the average individuars soul force — his courage-
ous expression of the best inspiration he can derive from the
divine spirit within and all about him?”
The average indivdduars soul force is any day the most im-
portant thing. The political form is hut a concrete expression
of that soul force. I do not conceive the average indiwduars
soul force as distinguished and existing apart from the political
form of government. Hence I believe that after all a people
has the government which it deserves. In other words, self-
government can only come through self-effort.
'Us not the basic need, everywhere, for the clarification and
development of this soul force in individuals — beginning, pos-
sibly, with a few people and spreading like a divine contagion,
to the many?”
It is, indeed.
'*You teach, rightly, that the faithful development of such
soul force in India will assure India’s freedom. Will it not
everywhere shape all political, economic and international in-
stitutions including the issues of peace or war? Can those
forms of human civilization be made radically superior in India
to the rest of the world — now, when all mankind are neigh-
bours?”
I have already ansv/ered this question in the preceding
paragraphs. I have claimed in these pages, before now that
India’s freedom must revolutionize the w’orld’s outlook upon
peace and war. Her impotence affects the whole of mankind.
“You know, better than 1 or anyone, how all these questions
should be answered. I chiefly seek to express my eager faith
in your gospel, my hungry desire for your leadership in solving
the urgent problems of America and of all mankind. There-
fore, will you graciously remember that, if (or when) the time
may come that India’s progress in the directions you have so
TO AMERICAN FRIENDS
37
inspiringly outlined appears to pause — ^waiting for the Western
world to come up alongside — ^then we of the West stand urging
you to give us a few months of your time and your personal
presence. My own feeling is that, if you will call us and instruct
us, we (your uncounted followers scattered obscurely over the
wide earth) will join our lives to yours in the discovery and
realization of a new and noble, world-wide Commonwealth of
the Spirit, in which man’s age-old dreams of Brotherhood, De-
mocracy, Peace, and Soul Progress shall characterize the daily
life of average people — in India, England, America, and every-
where.”
I wish I had confidence in my leadership on the world
platform. I have no false modesty about me. If I felt the
call within, I would not wait a single second but straightway
respond to an invitation so cordial as this. But. with my limita-
tions of which I am painfully conscious, I feel somehow that
my experiment must be restricted to a fragment. What may
be true of the fragment is likely to be true of the whole. It
is true indeed that India's progress in the direction I desire
seems to have come to a pause; but I think that it only seems
so. The little seed that was sown in 1920 has not perished.
It is, I think, taking deep root. Presently it will come out as
a stately tree. But if I am labouring imder a delusion, I fear
that no artificial stimulus that my visit to America may tem-
porarily bring can revive it. I am pining for the assistance
of the whole world. I see it coming. The urgent invitation is
one of the many signs. But I know that we shall have to de-
serve it before it comes upon us like a mighty flood, a flood that
cleanses and invigorates.
Young India, 17-9-1925
17
COMPULSORY MILITARY TRAINING
An Allahabad graduate writes :
“I am a registered graduate of the Allahabad University.
I am entitled to vote fof a candidate seeking election to the
Allahabad University Court.
Exception has been taken to my opposition to making mili-
tary training compulsory in the universities. On this point I
seek your opinion through the columns of Young India, My
view briefly is this :
I admit that under a Swaraj Government our young men
would be required to take to the army as a career and we shall
have to encourage that spirit. But under an alien government
I feel there is absolutely no security that these university corps
would not be used against the Indian nation, as the Indian army
has been used in the past. Aforeover, would it not be adding
another link to the chain of moral slavery, if our young men are
coinpelled to take up military training? Does it not clash v.ith
the ideal of a university, where at least we can expect a free
atmosphere for growth? Would it not cast our ideals in a
militarist mould? My information about foreign universities
is limited, but so far as I could gather I understand there is no
compulsion even in universities of free countries like England
and America. Even if we ignore political considerations, should
we not allow the individual his freedom of conscience to pre-
serve which large nmnbers of Englishmen went to jail during
the War? All of them were not afraid to die.
These are considerations which deserve fullest attention.
On the other hand, compulsion in physical training I would
gladly support — as a matter of fact, I advocate. I feel that,
if it is made compulsory, all the requirements of a university
would be met.
We should not shut the doors of the university against
those who hold different views on life or politics. There is
already too much of cramping in these institutions.”
As a pacifist by religion I heartily endorse all that my cor-
respondent says about compulsory military’' training' in the uni-
versities. But the argument seems to be sound even from the
purely utilitarian and national standpoint. Not only can there
be no security against the use being made of university corps
for purposes antagonistic to the national interest, but whilst the
>
38
COMPULSORY MILITARY TRAINING
39
Government retain its anti-national character there is every
likelihood of these corps being used against the nation on due
occasions. What, for instance, could prevent a future Dyer
from using these university men for enacting another Jalian-
wala Bagh? May not young men themselves offer their services
for an expedition against the innocent Chinese or the equally
innocent Tibetans when their subjection is felt necessary in the
interest of imperial commerce? Some of the young volunteers
who served during the war justified their action by saying that
thereby they gained experience in the^ art of war — jUst the
reason which consciously or unconsciously prompted some of the
Frontier expeditions. Those who run empires successfully have
an instinctive knowledge of humai^ nature. It is not deliberately
» bad or wicked. It acts excellently under a high impulse. And
thousands of young men, who before they join any corps must
take the oath of allegiance and must on scores of occasions salute
the Union Jack, will naturally want to give a good account of
their loyalty and willingly shOot down their fellow-men upon
receiving from their superiors orders to fire. Whilst, therefore,
even as an out and out believer in ahimsa I can understand and
appreciate military training for those who believe in the neces-
sity of the use of arms on given occasions, I am unable to advo-
cate the military training of the youth of the country under the
Government so long as it remains utterly irresponsive to the
needs of the people; and I should be against compulsory mili-
tary training in every case and even under a national Govern-
ment- Those who do not wish to take the military training
should not be debarred from joining public universities.
Physical culture stands on a different basis altogether. It can
be and should be part of any sound educational scheme even
as many other subjects are.
Young India, 24-9-1925
18
FROM EUROPE
When I think of my littleness and my limitations on the
one hand and of the expectations raised about me on the other,
I become dazed for the moment; but I come to myself as soon
as I realize that these expectations are a tribute not to me,
a curious mixture of Jekyll and Hyde, but to the incarnation,
however imperfect but comparatively great, in me of the two
priceless qualities of truth and non-violence. I must, therefore,
not shirk the responsibility of giving what aid I can to fellow
seekers after Truth from the West.
I have already dealt with a letter from America. I have
before me one from Germany. It is a closely reasoned letter.
It has remained with me for nearly a month. At first I thought
I would send a private reply and let it be published in Germany
if the correspondent desired it. But having re-read the letter
I have come to the conclusion that I should deal with it in
these columns. I give the letter below in full :
"Not only India but also the rest of the earth has heard
your message of Satyagraha and Swadeshi. A great number of
young people in Europe believe in your creed. They see in it
a new attitude to political things put into action, of which till
now they had only dreamed.
But also among the young people who are convinced of the
truth of your message are many who dissent from some details
of your demands on men which seem vrrong to them. In their
name is this letter written.
In answer to a question you declared on the 21st of March,
1921, that Satyagraha demands absolute non-violence, and
that even a woman who is in danger of being violated must
not defend herself with violence. On the other hand it is known
that you recommended the punishment of General Dyer by
the English Government, which shows that you see the necessity
for law guaranteed through violence. From this I can but con-
clude that you do not object to capital punishment and so do
not condemn killing in general. You value life so low that
you allow thousands of Indians to lose theirs for Satyagraha;
and doubtless you know that the least interference with the
life of men — imprisonment — is mainly based on the same
principle as the strongest — killing — ^for in each case men* arc
40
FROM EUROPE
41
caused by an outside force to diverge from their dharma. A
man who thinks logically knows that it is the same principle
that causes his imprisonment for a few days or his execution,
and that the difference is only in the size, not in the kind, of
interference. He knows, too, that a man who stands for punish-
ment in general must not shrink from killing.
You see in non-co-operation not an ideal only but also a
safe and quick way to freedom for India, a way possible only
where a whole population has to revolt against a Government
that has the force of arms. But when a whole State wants to
get its rights from another State, the principle of non-co-
operation is powerless, for this other one may get a number of
other States to form an alliance with it even when some of the
other States remain neutral. Not until a real League of Nations
exists, to which every State belongs, can non-co-operation be-
come a real power, since no State can afford to be isolated from
all the others. That is why we fight for the League of Nations;
but that is also the reason why we try to retain a strong police
force, lest internal revolts and disorder should make all foreign
policy impossible. That is why we understand that other Gov-
ernments are doing what they forbade us to do, arming ^em-
selves in case of an attack by their enemies. They are, for the
time being, obliged to do so, and we really ought to do the same
if we do not want to be continually violated. We hope that you
will see our point. If you do, we should be very much obliged
to you if you would say so in answer to this letter, for it is
necessary that the youth of Europe learns your true attitude to
these questions. 'But please do not think that we want you to
forswear something that is one of the main points of your
creed — Satyagraha.
But we see Satyagraha not in an absolute non-violence
which never, nowhere, has been really carried out, even by you,
or even by. Christ himself who drove the usurers out of the
temple. With us Satyagraha is the unreserved disposition to
brotherhood and sacrifice which you are showing us so splen-
didly with the Indian people; and we hope to be growing into the
same state of mind, since it has been understood that a system
may be wicked but never a whole class or a whole people (you
wrote about this on the 13th of July, 1921), and that one ought
to feel pity but not hatred for the blind defenders of wicked-
ness. Men who come to understand this are taking their first
steps on the new way to brotherhood between all men; and this
way v/ill lead to the goal, to the victory of truth, to Satyagraha.
We ask you in your answer not only to advise us to fight for
our country in the way we think right, but we would very much
like to know what you think to be right, especially hov’ you
justify an entire non-violence which we see as a resignation to
all real fighting against wickedness and for this reason wicked
42
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
in itself— as we would call a policeman wicked who let a criminal
escape unpunished.
Our conviction is that we ought to follow our own dhama
first, and before all that we ought to live the life designed for
us by God, but that the right and the duty is given to us to
interfere v;ith the life of our fellow-men when they ask us to
do so or when we see in such interference a way to fight a
threatening evil for all the world. We believe that otherwise
one is not right in interfering, for only God can see through the
soul of men and judge what is the right way for men; and we
believe that there is no greater sacrilege to be found than to
assume the place of God — ^w^ich sacrilege we believe the English
people to be guilty of, as they think to have the mission to
interfere with people all over the world. ^
For this reason we do not understand how you can recom-
mend to married people to deny themselves to each other with-
out mutual agreement, for such an interference with the rights
given by marriage can drive a man to crimes. You ought to
advise divorce in those cases.
Please answer these our questions. We are so glad to have
the model given by you that we want very much to be quite
clear about the right way to live up to your standard.”
In my travels I have not. the file of Young India before me,
but there is no difficulty about my endorsing the statement that
‘‘Satyagraha demands absolute non-violence, and that even a
woman who is in danger of being violated must not defend
herself with violence."' Both these statements relate to an ideal
state, and, therefore are made \vith reference to those -men and
women who have so far purified themselves as to have no malice,
no anger, no violence in them. That does not mean that the
woman in the imagined case would quietly allow herself to be
vdolated. In the first instance such a woman would stand in
no danger of violence; and in the second, if she did, without
doing violence to the ruffian she would be able completely to
defend her honour.
But I must not enter into details. Even women Vv^ho can
defend themselves with violence are not many. Happily, how-
ever, cases of indecent assaults are not also very many. Be that
'as it may, I believe implicitly in the proposition that perfect
purity is its own defence. The veriest ruffian becomes for the
time being tame in the presence of resplendent purity.
FROM EUROPE
4a
The writer is not correctly informed about my attitude in
regard to General Dyer. He would be pleased to know that not
only did I not recommend any punishment of General Dyer,
but even my colleagues, largely out of their generous regard for
me, waived the demands for punishment. What, however, I
did ask for, and I do press for even now, is the stopping of the
pension to General Dyer. It is no part of the plan of non-
violence to pay the v^rong-doer for the wrong he does, which
practically would be the case if I became a willing party to
the continuation of the pension to General Dyer. But let me
not be misunderstood. I am quite capable of recommending
even punishment to wrong-doers under conceivable circum-
stances; for instance, I would not hesitate under the present
state of society to confine thieves and robbers, which is in itself
a kind of pxmishment. But I ’would also admit that it is not
Satyagraha, and that it is a fall from the pure doctrine. That
would be an admission not of the weakness of the doctrine but
the weakness of myself. I have no other remedy to suggest
in such cases in the present state of society. I am therefore
satisfied with advocating the use of prison more as reformatories
than as places of punishment.
But I would draw the distinction between killing and de-
tention or even corporal punishment. I think that there is a
’difference not merely in quantity but also in quality. I can
, recall the punishment of detention. I can make reparation to
the man upon whom I inflict corporal punishment. But once
a man is killed, the punishment is beyond recall or reparation.
God alone can take life, because He alone gives it.
I hope there is no confusion in the writer’s mind when he
couples the self-immolation of a Satyagrahi with the punish-
ment imposed from without. But in order to avoid even a
possibility of it, let me make it clear that the doctrine of
violence has reference only to the doing of injury by one to
another. Suffering injury in one’s own person is, on the con-
trary, of the essence of non-violence and is the chosen substi-
tute for violence to others. It is not because I value life low
that I can countenance with joy thousands voluntarily losing
their lives for Satyagraha, but because I know that it results
in the long run in the least loss of life, and, what is more, it
ennobles those who lose their lives and morally enriches the
44
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
world for their sacrifice. I think that the vmtev is correct in
saying that non-cooperation is not merely an ideal but also “a
safe and quick way to freedom for India,” I do suggest that the
•doctrine holds good also as between States and States. I know
that I am treading on delicate ground if I refer to the late war.
But I fear that I must, in order to make the position clear. It
was a war of aggrandizement, as I have understood, on either
part. It was a war of di\iding the spoils of the exploitation of
weaker races — otherwise euphemi^ically called the world com-
merce. If Germany to-day changed her policy and made a
determination to use her freedom not for dividing the commerce
of the world but for protecting through her moral superiority
the weaker races of the earth, she could certainly do that with-
out armament. It would be found that before general disarma-
ment in Europe commences, as it must some day unless Europe
is to commit suicide, some nation vdll have to dare to disarm
herself and take large risks. The level of non-violence in that
nation, if that event happily comes to pass, will naturally have
risen so high as to command universal respect. Her judgments
will be unerring, her decisions will be firm, her capacity for
heroic seK-sacrifice will be great, and she will want to live as
much for other nations as for herself. I may not push this
delicate subject any further- I know that I am writing in a
theoretical way upon a practical question without knowing all
its bearings. My only excuse is, if I understand it correctly,
that that is what the writer has wanted me to do.
I do justify entire non-violence, and consider it possible'in
relation bet%veen man and man and nations and nations; but it
is not “a resignation from all real fighting against wickedness”-
On the contrary, the non-violence of my conception is a more
active and more real fighting against wickedness than retalia-
tion whose very nature is to increase wickedness. I contemplate
a mental, and therefore a moral, opposition to immoralities. I
seek entirely to blunt the edge of the tyrant’s sword, not by
putting up against it a sharper-edged weapon, but by disap-
pointing his expectation that I would be offering physical re-
sistance. The resistance of the soul that I should oJEfer instead
would elude him. It would at first dazzle him, and at last
compel recognition from him, v/hich recognition v/ould not
humiliate him but would uplift him. It may be urged that this
PROM EUROPE
45
again is an ideal state. And so it is. The propositions from
which I have drawn my arguments are as true as Euclid’s de-
finitions, which are none the less true, because in practice we
are unable even to draw Euclid’s line on a blackboard. But even
a geometrician finds it impossible to get on without bearing in
mind Euclid’s definitions. Nor may we, the German friend, his
colleagues and myself, dispense with the fundamental proposi-
tions on which the doctrine of Satyagraha is based.
• There remains for me now only one ticklish question to
answer. In a most ingenious manner the writer has compared
the English arrogation of the right of becoming tutors to the
whole world to my views on relations between married people.
But the comparison does not hold good! The marriage bond
involves seeing each other only by mutual agreement- But
surely abstention requires no consent. Married lifp would be
intolerable, as it does become, when one partner breaks through
all bonds of restraint. Marriage confirms the right of union
between two partners to the exclusion of all the others when
in their joint opinion they consider such union to be desirable.
But it confers no right upon one partner to demand obedience
of the other to one’s wish for union. What should be done when
one partner on moral or other grounds cannot conform to the
wishes of the other is a separate question. Personally, if divorce
was the only alternative, I should not hesitate to accept it,
rather_ than interrupt my moral progress — assuming that I want
to restrain myself bn purely moral grounds.
Young India, 8-10-1925
19
EUROPEAN CIVILIZATION
A Danish friend sends me translation of extracts from an
article printed in Gads Danske Magasin. The heading he has
given to the extracts is ‘‘European civilization and Gandhi”,
In adopting his heading for Young India I have omitted my
name, as I have omitted references to my views in the extracts.
My views are nothing new to the readers of Young India- Here
is the translation received :
“Europe boasts of her civilization, her Christian civiliza*
tion.
The triumphant career of the White race throughout the
earth is the watchword of the time.
A trimnphant career of the race — ^that is true. But of
Civilization, Humanity, Christianity? Justice turns her face
away and weeps.
Will you find a hell of racial hatred and inhumanity? Tlien
go to Europe.
Look at the collective policy of the Christian Powers in
China. First act: shameless extortion, exercised for ages by
European profiteers. Second act: the enraged natives react by
killing a German ambassador. Third act: Europe undertakes
her ‘Hunnic crusade' under German lead, and in the spirit of
that watchword which was ironically pronounced by the
satirical paper Simplicissimus in an imagined speech of the
German officer: ‘Now I propose a toast to a vigorous propagation
of the Gospel and a victorious walk over the Chinese swine-
dogs (Schweinehimde)I'
Too justly the Chinese have called us 'the red-haired bar-
barians’ or ‘the red-haired devils’.
Let us now look at some species of the European homo
sapiens. '
Tlie Italians may desen^e honourable mention, because
Christianity caused them to give up their bestial baitings of
wild beasts about 400 A.D. How unwillingly the ancient Romans
gave up their ‘circenses’ appears from a curious anecdote. A
clergyman found it difficult to keep the converted nv;ay from the
circus. Then he said: ‘Dear Christians! You 7 nust avoid these
bloody heathen plays. Then, in reward, you may hope that In
heaven there may be a peep-hole through which you may re-
4G
EUROPEAN CIVILIZATION
4T
gard the V condemned sinners in the eternal fire of the hell!*
Indeed, a fine and noble 'Christian' idea!
To characterize the standard of the 'most Christian' nation
of Spaniards it is sufficient to mention the fact that the
favourite play of the nation is till this day the bull fight. The
national hero is the 'grantoreador' — a cruel tormentor of
animals.
I
France has created the hunting 'parforce'.
England adheres to the same noble sport. Look at the
illustrated papers publisfied in honour of the Christmas, the
Christian feast of peace and charity! During a dinner in
Denmark, a Danish gentleman by the way told an English lady
that he had shot a fox. 'Good gracious! You don't say so!
Shot a fox?' cried she immediately, seizing him by his arm.
Then she turned him her back with contempt, for it was un-
worthy of a gentleman not to torment the poor animal to
death! A Danish clergyman sailing on the Red Sea once wit-
nessed the natives diving from the steamer for coins. But the
English ladies were not content to see them jump out from the
deck; they ordered them to jump out from the tops of the
masts, to make it more exciting! The opium war and the
treatment of Eire in past centuries are other proofs of English
morals. Owing to the resistance of the English nation to con-
scription, England fortunately has avoided the use of forced
cannon-food. But what was the munificently promised reward of
the Indian volunteers in the great war? It is sufficient to name
Amritsar.
Germany has created the most brutal 'moral of masters'
before the Bolshevism and the most systematic oppression of
the nations ‘of minor value’ ('minderwertig'). The Pan-German
programme of 1895 privileges the ‘full Germans’ to vote, to be
elected for parliaments and offices, apd to buy ground property.
They willingly tolerate the foreigners in the country as exer-
cisers of the ^Inferior Bodily Lahour\ A Danish surgeon as
visitor in a German hospital once witnessed the transfer of
living tissue from one body into another. As he wondered how
it would be possible to obtain sufficient mass of tissue, the Ger-
man professor answered: ‘IVir haben ja Polen genug^ (We have
enough of Poles). The Delbruck Law of 1912 enabled Gennan
emigrants to remain secretly citizens of the German Empire,
after they had officially obtained the citizenship of the unsus-
pecting foreign States, a fine and noble means of creating
thousands of underground agents of '‘Pan-Germanism. Conscrip-
tion procured the Germans millions of sons of the ‘minderwertig’
nations to serve as cannon-food in their wars, while the relations
of the victims were oppressed at home in the most brutal manner.
48
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
6,000 Danes from North Schelsvig were thus slaughtered in
the great war for a foreign and hated cause. Through the ‘civil
conscription* the Germans carried away thousands of Belgians
into slaverj^* sometimes these wretches were even forced to work
within the line of fire.
Bolshevism is indebted to the great German Staff for the
fortunate foundation of its rule. Pan-German methods of
brutality and lie are unfortunately practised and even surpassed*
We observe an element of^ Jewish fanaticism, which results in
mere madness. We may here refer to the contents of a Bolshe-
vist poem from the collection ‘Tsheka ulibajet’, published in
1922 by A. Saprudni; ‘You prefer to sing of love. I will teach
you other songs, of blood, execution, and death. Enough of the
gentle fragrance of lilacs! I prefer the flowers of murder. It
is the highest delight to crucify the man who loves his neigh-
bour. What a fun to cut a man to pieces! Look, how he quivers
for fear, look, at his convulsions while he is slowly strangled by
the hangman. What a pleasure to inflict wounds. Listen to
our sentence of death: a rope, a shot! A wall! Give fire!— And
the grave is your fate.*
Three points of European morals are emphasized, viz. the
moral of masters, the policy of lie, and the policy of murder.
In order to illustrate the European standard, I quote an address
delivered by Professor Theol, Baumgarten in Kiel 1915 (printed
in Norddentsche Allgemeine Zeitung, 15th ^y, 1915).
The pious professor states that the Sermon on the Mount
simply excludes war. But this rule is only meant for single
persons. ‘The ethical system of the Sermon on the Moimt re-
presents another compartment of our moral life than our
national standard. Its rules for the single soul are not broken,
because we realize that it is not at the same time a law for our
national and social life.* The State, says Prof. B., is created
by God and must be defended with the utmost energy. Tt is a
characteristic of the great nation that it uses the most extreme
means, and even the war of aggression, in order to carry out its
great aims.* ‘We Germans feel obliged, not only to agree vdth
the war, hut also to lead it with the most absolute recklessness.
He who has not in these days made up his mind to salute the
destruction of Lusitania with jubilant applause and to rejoice
at the formidable power of German arms, is no right German.* **
These extracts present a very lurid picture, but probably
they are true in substance. That the sum total of the activities
of European nations is a denial of the teachings of the Sermon
on the Mount will not, I think, be gainsaid. I have produced the
extracts merely to emphasize the necessary caution against our
being lifted off our feet by the dazzle and the glitter of European
A QUESTION
49
arms. If the foregoing picture were the whole of Europe, it
would be sad for Europe as for the world. Fortimately there
is a considerable body of men and women of Europe who are
devoting the whole of their energy to combat the war-fever
and the breathless pursuit after material wealth and enjoy-
ment. There are reasons for hoping that this body is daily
gaining in numbers and in influence. May it be the privilege of
India to takejpart in the new awakening and to advance it,
' instead of retarding it, by succumbing to the European excesses
which the best mind of Europe condemns in unmeasured terms
and is manfully struggling to bring imder effective control.
Young India, 15-10-1925
20
A QUESTION
"Were you not helping the cause of war when you, both
while in Africa and here, enlisted men for field service? How
does it tally with your principle of ahimsaT^
By enlisting men for ambulance-work in South Africa and
in England, and recruits for field service in India, I helped not
the cause of war, but I helped the institution called the British
Empire in whose ultimate beneficial character I then believed.
My repugnance to war was as strong then as it is today; and I
could not then have, and would not have, shouldered a rifle.
But one’s life is not a single straight line; it is a himdle of duties
very often conflicting. And one is called upon continually to
^make one’s choice between one duty and another. As a citizen
not then, and not even now, but a reformer leading an agitation
against the institution of war, I had to advise and lead men
who believed in war but who, from cowardice or from base
motives or from anger against the British Government, refrain-
ed from enlisting. I did not hesitate to advise them that, so
lorn? as they believed in war and professed loyalty to the British
constitution, they were in duty bound to support i^ by enlist-
ment. Though I do not believe in the use of arms, and though
it is contrary to the religion of ahirasa which I profess, I should
not hesitate to join an agitation for a repeal of the debasing
Arms Act which I have considered amongst the blackest crimes
50 NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
t
of the British Government against India. I do not believe in
retahation, but I did not hesitate to tell' the villagers near Bet-
tiah four years ago that they who knew nothing of ahivisa were
guilty of cowardice in failing to defend the honour of their
womenfolk and their property by force of arms. And I have
not hesitated, as the correspondent should know, only recently
to tell the Hindus that, if they do not believe in out and out
ahimsa and cannot practise it, they will be guilty of a crime
against their religion and humanity, if they fail to defend by
force of arms the honour of their women against any kidnapper
who chooses to take away their women- And all this advice
and my. previous practice I hold to be not only consistent with
my profession of the religion of ahimsa out and out, but a direct
result of it. To state that noble doctrine is simple enough;, to
know it and to practise it in the midst of a world full of strife,
turmoil and passions, is a task whose difficulty I realize more
and more day by day. And yet the conviction too that wthout
it life is not worth living is growing daily deeper.
Young India, 5-11-1925
I
21 ' , ^
OUR IMPOTENCE
The following letter has been addressed to me by Hakim
Saheb Ajmal Khan and Dr* Ansari who have jnst returned from
a prolonged tour on the Continent including Syria :
'"Recent events in Southern Syria, the country where Druses
live and where an armed resistance is being carried on by these
oppressed people against the French, the Mandatory Power,
' have brought to light the .frightfulne'ss of the French authorities
there. A cable, received two days back from Palestine, sent by
Syed Jamaluddin-al-husaini, Secretary of Lajnatut-Tanfiziyah,
the most popular and influential organization of the people of
Palestine, says that the town of Damascus has terribly suffered
from the French bombardment and the death roll has been
tremendous. Although from the various accounts published in
the. British Press one could gather that things were bad in
Syria, yet this telegram from Palestine and Reuter’s cable from
Cairo, received subsequently, show the utter barbarity and in-
humanity which are being practised by the French on the po-
pulation in the Druse country and Damascus.
• OUR IMPOTENCE
51
Apart from the recent instances of frightfulness, our tour
in Syria brought under our observation many facts which prov-
ed the callousness of the French and their utter disregard for
the eJementary rights of the people of the mandated territory
in Syria.
We have already published our experiences in the Indian
Press, but in order to save you the trouble of reading the Urdu
reports published in Hamdard, we would briefly give you some
of the most salient facts regarding the situation in Syria.
When the League of Nations gave the mandate of Syria to
P*rance, the French Government and the High Commissioner
made a public declaration to the people of Syria of granting
them complete autonomy regarding their internal affairs. Syria
was to be divided in several autonomous provinces, each with a
Governor, elected by the people, and an advisory council re-
presenting the people and elected hy them. Whilst this promise
was partially and outwardly carried out in the provinces of
Lebanon and Damascus, the province of Hauran, the country of
Druses' was neither given autonomy nor a council nor a presi-
dent elected by them, but a French officer, Captain CarbioUet,
was forced on the Druses against their wish; and when they
made demonstrations and representations against this, their
deputation was insulted, their notables were publicly thrashed
and imprisoned, and their womenfolk were maltreated.
Captain CarbioUet, who had come from French Congo,
practised all the atrocities ^to which the poor inhabitants of
French Congo had been subjected by the French; but the Druses,
being an ancient, proud, warlike race, resisted these methods
and were forced to take up arms. They inflicted considerable
losses on the French forces, and have so far resisted the French
invasion of their country successfully; but the methods practised
by the French in the adjoining part» of Syria, viz. Damascus
and Alleppo, are causing the spread of revolt to these parts.
The telegrams quoted above refer to the most recent atrocities
committed on the people of Damascus.
The French Government are also practising unfair and dis-
honest methods, and are depleting the country of its v/ealth by
removing all the gold in the country and replacing it by paper
money. They are gradually undermining all the economic re-
sources of the country, which is resulting in destitution and
poverty. To add to this depletion they have also been collect-
ing gold from the people of towns and villages in the shape of
fines and punishments.
We are writing this to you in order to elicit your sympathy
for these Asiatic brethren, and to request you, as the President
of the Congress, to send a cable to the League of Nations which
has granted this mandate to France, and to instruct other Con-
52
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
Brass organizations to do the same. We are conscious that the
present situation in India is not very favourable to such an
action, but it is our considered opinion, as Indians, as Muslims,
and as Asiatics, that we should sympathize with all the oppressed
Asiatic people, and cultivate friendly relations with them which
would be beneficial to us and to them.”
I could not see my •way to accept their advice to send a
cable to the League of Nations in the name of the Congress, and
therefore sent •the following answer:
have the letter signed by ^you and Hakim Saheb. What
is the use of the Congress President sending a cable to the
League of Nations? I feel like a caged lion, only with this dif-
ference that the lion foams and frets and gnashes his teeth
and lashes the iron bars furiously in the vain attempt to be free,
whereas I recognize my limitations and refuse to foam and fret.
If we had any power behind us, I would immediately send the
cable suggested by you. Things I omit to mention in the pages
of Young India are buried deep down in my bosom, and they
are far weightier than those I advertise. But I do not fail to
advertise them daily before the Unseen Power. Wlien I think
of the horizon about us, my heart becomes sick and weary. And
when I listen to the still small voice within, I derive hope and
smile in spite of the conflagration raging round me. Do save
me from having to advertise our impotence.”
But the next best thing I could do was to publish the
valuable letter and my reply, I do not believe in making ap-
peals when there is no force behind them, whether moral or
material. Moral force conies from the determination of the
appellants to do something, to sacrifice something for the sake
of making their appeal effective. Even children instinctively
know this elementary principle. They starve, they cry, or, if
they are naughty, they do not hesitate to strike their mothers
who will not grant their peremptory demands. Unless we re-
cognize and are prepared to reduce to practise this principle,
we can but expose the Congress and ourselves to ridicule, if
not worse.
We cannot be naughty even if we will. We can suffer if
only we will. I want us as Indians. Hindus or Mussalmans,
Christians or Parsis, or Asiatics, to realize our impotence, in the
face of this humiliation, barbarity, Dyerism, or call it what you *
will, inflicted on Syria. A definite realization of our impotence
might teach us to imitate, if it is only the animals who in the
presence of stormy weather come close together and seek
53
OUE IMPOpiNCE
warmth and courage from one another. They do not make a
vain appeal to the god of the weather to moderate his wrath.
They simply provide against it.
And we? Hindus and Mussahnans fight against one another,
and the gulf seems to be daily widening. We have not yet
understood the meaning of the charkha. Those that have, find
all kinds of pretexts not to wear khaddar and not to spin. The
storm is raging round us. And instead of seeking warmth one
from the other, we prefer to shiver or petition the god of storms
to stay his hand. If I cannot bring about Hindu-Muslim imion
or persuade the people to take up the wheel, I have the wisdom
at least not to sign any petition for mercy.
And what is the League of. Nations? Is it not in reality
merely England and France? Do the other Powers count? Is
it any use appealing to France which is denying her motto of
Fraternity, Equality and Justice? She has denied justice to
Germany, there is little fraternity between her and the Riffs,
and the doctrine of equality she is trampling under foot in Syria.
If we would appeal to England, we need not go to the League
of Nations. She is much nearer home. She is perched on the
heights of Simla except when she descends to Delhi for a brief
period. But to appeal to her is to appeal to Caesar against
Augustus. I
Let us then perceive the truth in its nakedness, and learn
to appeal to the nation to do her duty. Relief of S 3 nria lies
through India. And if we cannot ' appreciate our greatness, let
us confess our littleness and say nothing. But we need not be
little. Let us do at least one thing thoroughly — either fight
to the bitter end, even as our brothers the four-footed animals
often do, or as men let us learn and teach through co-operation
on the largest scale known to the world the uselessness, nay,
the sinfulness of exploitation of those weaker than ourselves.
That co-operation among millions is possible only through the
spinning wheel-
Young India, 12-11-1925
22
IN mriGATION
I gladly publish the following from a German friend:
''Last year, you published in Young India several articles on
or letters from Germany which needs must give wrong impres-
sions as to the situation in our country. I intend to set right
any false information about our country, though I am conrinc-
ed you won’t have got contemptuous opinion concerning the
German nation. I hope you will endorse a statement of C. P.
Andrews writing to me on the 10th of July 1925: 'I believe that
India and Germany may meet on the basis of pure idealism
more closely than any other nations of the world.’ And in all
humility I should like to give some remarks, for your inlomia-
tion, on the above-mentioned articles.
Let me begin with one of jour deepest confessions:
Refuge’ (r. 9-10- ’24). Every word of criticism should re-
main silent before such a pra 3 ^er. But even unconsciously no
wrong should be done even to the Kaiser. He never aimed at
the crown of Europe. His idea was only a fantastic creation
of war propaganda. The Kaiser was neither a monster nor a
Caesar; he was a pitiftd actor, a poor fool, a product of a wrong
education and flattering milieu. We don’t excuse him, but we
wont plead him guilty for intentions never intended.
As to the article 'From Europe’ (F. 1925. Ko. 41) notliing
need be objected to. I feel that letter was written by a member
of the German Youth Idorement. And the movement of rege-
nerating the soul and spirit among the young of all nations from
Europe to China, India and America may fill you with more
confidence for the future. I hope the younger generation once
will realize what the older failed to do. Most of them are anti-
imperialistic, and stand for justice and freedom among all the
nations and for the independence of so-called colonies; they
try to leave the old tract of capitalism and materialism. I vriil
send some booklets containing reports from the English Youth
Movement. Though it is stiU small, it is a great and new hope
for coming years. Some of the pamphlets are only proofs, but
you will be interested in tbe reports on Indian youth.
The article on ’European Civilization’ in No. 42 is right in
its tendency and sceptical view. But I fear that something of
Denmark's antipathy towards Germany might have exaggerated
the information. The moral of masters as a romantic conception
of Neitzche’s philosophy of life has nothing to do with the
military moral of Prussian Generals who forgot the measure.
IN MITIGATION
55
The Pan -German propaganda was the senseless activity of a
small though dangerous clique, and never got a decisive influ-
ence on the oflacial decisions of our Government, excepting per-
haps during the last months of the war (Ludendorff I). Pro-
fessor Baumgarten himself- as a liberal theologian in the later
years of the war was one of the leading personalities in the fight
against militarism and for a peaceful agreement among the
nations.
The anecdote of the transfer of living tissue Cwe have
enough of Poles for it') may be true, but exaggerated. In no
way can it be generalized. It may have been a practical joke;
a§ chirurgy very often shows a very inhuman aspect, because the
physicians try to hide their inmost feelings or they would be
overwhelmed by compassion. Remember that Germany, already
in war time before her serious defeat, created a free State for
the Poles.
The Schleswig question is much complicated. We did wrong
enough in the war, the greatest being the invasion into Bel-
gium; but we did not order 6,000 Schleswig Danes to be slaught-
ered. The inhabitants of Schleswig and of Alsace were as much
subjects of the German Government as the Irish of the English.
Germany was brutal in her defence, but which of our former
adversaries was less brutal and more reconciliatory?
I think we only will make a step forward by leaving back
the past period, not by stirring up again and again these black
and tragic impressions of European breakdown, and imputing
the moral responsibility to one nation or another. We all, also
the Danes, were on the wrong way; we all — Germany hand in
hand with Denmark — must look out for the revival of the soul,
of real culture, of belief. ®
Last, No. 47: *A Cry from Germany*. We fully agree vuth
your answer. The writer is one of the sentimental passive types
of an eccentric feeling we often find in times of distress. Cor-
ruption is not worse here than elsewhere. There’s only one re-
medy: Action! Do, do something. There are many tasks in a
regenerating nation and in a young constitution. You will have
got more of such letters from enthusiastic, even hysterical,
German admirers. We understand their feelings, we regret
them, but they are not representative of Germany.”
* The writer is right in feeling assured that T can have no
contemptuous opinion about Germans or Germany. Who can
dare? Germans are a great and brave people. Their industry,
their scholarship, and ‘their bravery command, the admiration
of the world. One hopes that they will lead the peace move-
ment. They were defeated in the last war, not vanquished. All
that is needed is a transmutation of their marvellous energy
56
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
for the promotion of the progress of the world as a whole, rather
than its application for their own as against that of the whole
world. There are signs of that desirable change coming over
them as over the other peoples of the earth.
Young India, 25-2-1926
23
WAR OR PEACE?
It was not without purpose that I reproduced" the main
parts of Mr. Kirby Page’s very able pamphlet on the World
War. I hope that the reader followed them with the care and
attention the chapters deserved. Mr. Page has proved con-
clusively that both the parties were equally to blame, and that
•both resorted to barbarous and inhuman practices. We did not
need Mr. Page’s help to learn that no war of which history has
any record took so many lives as this did. Moral loss was
greater still. Poisonous forces destructive of the soul (lying
and deception) were brought to perfection as much as the forces
destructive of the body. The moral results have been as ter-
rible as the physical. It is yet too early to measure the effect
on mankind of the collapse of the sexual morality brought
about by the War. Vice has usurped the throne of virtue. The
brute in man has for the time being gained supremacy.
The after-effects are, perhaps more terrible than the actual
and immediate effects. There is no stability about the Gov-
ernment of any single State of Europe. No class is satisfied
with its own condition. Each wants to better it at the expense
of the rest. War between the States has now become a war
within each State.
India has to make her choice. She may try, if she wishes,
the way of war and sink lower than she has. In the Kindu-
Muslim quarrel she seems to be taking her first lesson in the
art of war. If India can possibly gain her freedom by war, her
state will be no better and will be probably much worse than
that of France or England. Past examples have become obsolete.
Not even Japan’s comparative progress can be any ^guide. For,
‘the science’ of war has made much greater ‘progress’ since the
WAR OR PEACE ?
57
Russo-Japanese war. Its result can only be studied in the pre-
sent condition of Europe. We can safely say that, if India
throws off the British yoke by the way of war, she must go
through the state Mr. Page has graphically described.
But the way of peace is open to her. Her freedom is assur-
ed if she has patience. That way will be found to be the shortest
even though it may appear to be the longest to our impatient
nature. The way of peace insures internal growth and stability.
We reject it because we fancy that it involves submission to
the will of the ruler who has imposed himself upon us. But the
moment we realize that the imposition is only so called and
that, through our un-willingness to suffer loss of life or property,
we are party to the imposition, all we need do is to change that
negative attitude of passive endorsement. The suffering to be
undergone by the change will be nothing compared to the phy-
sical suffering and the moral loss we must incur in trying the
way of war. And. the sufferings of war harm both the parties.
The sufferings in following the way of peace must benefit both.
They will be like the pleasurable travail of a new birth.
Let us not be misled by a hasty generalization of the events
of 1920-21. Great as the achievement of that brilliant period
was, it was nothing compared to what it might have been, had
we been true and had faith. Violence was in the breasts of
many of us whilst with our lips we paid homage to non-violence-
-And though we were thus false to our creed, so far as we had
accepted it, we blamed it and lost faith instead of blaming and
.correcting ourselves. Chaiu’i Chaura was a symptom of the
disease that was poisoning us. Ours was claimed to be a peace-
fulj non-violent way. We could not sustain the claim in its
fulness. The ‘ enemy’s taunts we need not mind. They saw
violence even where there was not a trace of it. But we could
not disregard the judgment of the ‘still small voice within’.
It knew the violence within. *
Tlie -way of peace is the way of truth. Truthfulness is even
more important than peacefulness. Indeed, lying is the mother
of violence. A truthful man cannot long remain violent. He
will perceive in the coprse of his search that he has no need to
be violent, and he will further discover that so long as there is
the slightest trace of violence in him, he will fail to find the
truth he is searching.
58
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
There is no half way between truth aiid non-violence on
the one hand, and untruth and violence on the other. We may
never be strong enough to be entirely non-violent in thought,
word and deed. But we must keep non-violence as our goal
and make steady progress towards it. The attainment of free-
dom, whether for a man, a nation or the world, must be in exact
proportion to the attainment of non-violence by each. Let those,
therefore, who believe in non-violence as the only method of
achieving real freedom, keep the lamp of non-violence burning
bright in the midst of the present impenetrable gloom. The
trutl^ of a few will count; the untruth of millions will vanish
even like chaff before a whiff of wind.
Young India, 20-5-1926
24
HAS NON-VIOLENCE LIMITS?
The following is an extract from a detailed letter from a
correspondent who gives his full name and address:
“You may know what is happening to Congress workers in
Madras. During the last two days the Justice Party men have
excelled themselves in their abominations. Shri . . . accom-
'^panied by Shri . . . was canvassing votes Yor Shri . . the
Congress candidate. A group of Justice men who kept follow-
ing Shri . . . and others when they came near the Justice can-
didate's house suddenly surrounded the Congress workers and ^
spat upon . . . and . . .'s faces. You know, none better, what
indignity it is to be spat upon. Has communalism been able to
demoralize public life and work to such a depth? The object
of addressing you these few words is to ask you to cnunciate
your theory of fion-violence with reference to what a Congress-
man should do under circumstances of such grave indignity
’ and insult. There have also been assaults upon ... So far
I as our attitude towards the Government is concerned, we admit
it is expedient to be non-violent in conduct. But is that attitude
to be continued in relation to our own misguided and cruel
'bountrymen who take to assaulting, spitting, and to throwing
night-soil on peaceful Congress workers? May I also bring to
your notice that Congress sympathizers are many, while the
paid hooligans are counted on one’s fingers, so that, if we only
want to put a stop to hooliganism, we can do it effectively by
; resorting to violent methods? But we happen to' be members of
an organization pledged to non-violence. The provocation Is
HAS NON-VIOLENCE LIMITS ?
59
increasing every day, and it may not be possible for Congress
workers to restrain the youthful followers from taking the lav/
into their own hands. Therefore, may I ask you to state if
private defence is compatible with non-violence and with what
qualifications it should be exercised? The hooligan tactics of
the Justice Party are testing our faith in non-violence very
severely. Therefore we in Madras will greatly benefit by your
advice at this critical moment. One reason why I request you
to publish your opinion as early as you possibly can is that we
are told that the- Justice Party is experimenting with hooligan
tactics to see if it succeeds, so that they might systematize it
into a regular art of political v/arfare against the Congress in
the coming Council and Assembly elections in November.''
I have purposely erased names of men and places; for,
their discovery is not required for my purpose. Time for ex-
pedient non-violence passed away long ago. Those who cannot
be non-violent at heart are under no obligation to be non-
violent under the circumstances mentioned by the correspondent.
Though non-violence is the creed of the Congress, nobody now
refers to the creed for being or remaining non-violent. Every
Congressman who is non-violent, is so because he cannot be
otherwise. My advice, therefore, emphatically is that no one'
need refer to me or any other Congressman for advice in the
matter of non-violence. Everyone must act on his own respon-
sibility, and interpret the Congress creed to the best of his
ability and Relief. I have often noticed that weak people have
taken shelter under the Congress creed or under my advice,
when they have simply, by reason of their cowardice, been
unable to defend their own honour or that of those who were
entrusted to their care. I recall the incident that happened near
Bettiah when non-cooperation was at its height. Some villagers
were looted. They had fled, leaving their wives, children and
belongings to the mercy of the looters. When I rebuked them
for their cowardice in thus neglecting their charge, they shame-
lessly pleaded non-violence. I publicly denounced their coi^duct
and said that * my non-violence fully accommodated violence
offered by those who did not feel non-violence and who had in
their keeping the honour of their womenfolk and little children.
Non-violence is not a cover for cowardice, but it is the supreme
virtue of the brave- Exercise of non-violence requires far
greater bravery than that of swordsmanship. Cowardice is
Avholly inconsistent with non-violence. Translation from
swordsmanship to non-violence is possible and, at times, even an
'GO NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE A^ WAR
easy stage. Non-violence, therefore, presupposes ability to
strike. It is a conscious deliberate restraint put upon one’s
desire for vengeance. But vengeance is any day superior to
passive, effeminate and hdlpless submission. Forgiveness is
higher stilL Vengeance too is weakness. The desire for ven-
geance comes out of fear of harm, imaginary or real. A dog
barks and bites when he fears. A man who'" fears no one on
earth would consider it too troublesome even to summon up
anger against one who is vainly trying to injure him. The sun
does not wreak vengeance upon little children who throw dust
at him. They only harm themselves in the act.
I do not know whether the statements made by the cor-
respondent about the misdeeds of the Justice Party men are
true. Perhaps there is another side to the story. But, assum-
ing the truth of the statements, I can only congratulate those
who are spat upon, or assaulted, or had night-soil thrown upon
them. No injury has happened to them, if they had the courage
to suffer the insult without even mental retaliation. But it was
wholly wrong ^on their part to suffer it, if they felt irritated but
refrained out of expedience from retaliating. A sense of self-
respect disdains all expedience. But I wonder what kind of
punishment could be meted out by distinguished Congressmen
who, as the correspondent states, were too numerous for the
few hooligans of the Justice Party. Were they to Return night-
soil with night-soil, spitting with spitting, and abuse with abuse?
Or would the self-respect of this numerous party be better
consulted by ignoring the few hooligans? When non-cooperation
was the fashion, I know what was done to hooligans who tried
to disturb meetings. They were held down by volunteers who
caused them no hurt, but, if they continued to howl, their howl-
ing was ignored. I know that even in those days in several cases
the law of non-violence was broken, and any man who dared to
‘disturb the meetings or put in a word of opposition was howled
'down by the violent majority or sometimes even roughly handled
to the discredit of the majority and the movement which they
'SO thoughtlessly betrayed and misrepresented. I suggest also
to this Congressman and to those whom he may represent that,
if the object is to win over the Justice Party or any other Party
to the Congress, then they should be treated gently even though
they may act harshly. If it is to suppress all opponents, then
61
non-resistance true and false
double retaliation or Dyerism is the chosen remedy. Whether
that can bring us any nearer Swaraj is of course another ques-
tion.
But all my advice is useless where conviction is wanting.
Let every Congressman, therefore, weigh all the pros and cons,
then make his definite choice and act accordingly, irrespective
of consequences. He wiU then have acted truly even though it
may- be mistakenly. A thousand mistakes unconsciously made
are better than the most scrupulously correct conduct without
conviction behind to back it. It is like a whited sepulchre. Above
all we must be true to ourselves, if we will be true to.the country
and lead it to its chosen goal. Let there be no cant a^ut
tno^ence. It is not like a garment to be put on and off at wiU.
Its seat is in the heart, and it must be an inseparable part of
our very being.
Young India, 12-8-1926
25
NON-RESISTANCE TRUE AND FALSE
America is the house of the inter-racial conflict on a vast
sca'le. There are earnest men and women in that Ian o
prises who are seeking to solve the difficult problem a ong
lines of non-resistance. One such American frien sen s m
a paper called The Inquiry which cont^s an interesting discus-
sion on the doctrine of non-resistance. It consists o ms
that mieht possibly be grouped under non-resistance. -c ec
three samples:
“A Chinese student related his experience ^t the State
Universitv from which he was about to ^adua . - ^ riart
there had been anvthiug but friendly for
although a few men had gone out of their way o -ropek-
one of them even inviting' the Chinese
end. On the other hand, a fellow student who oc P ohoes
■next to his made himself narticularly obnoxious, ^h^mg shoes
aeainst his door and indulsdn'r in other .
overheard this '•tu^’ent ex’-ress horror on finding
American had taken him home to introduce hiin
and sister, and immediately be made up his mind that he would
62
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND, WAR ^ •
teach this student to respect him, not for his own sake, but for
the sake of his dear motherland.
So he went out of his way to be friendly to his neighbour.
Every day he gave him a smiling good morning, though at first
he received no response. He ignored every insult, but tried to
make himself pleasant and useful. When he knew his neighbour
to be hard up he casually invited him to go to a movie vAth
him. Gradually they talked together more often and found they
had several interests in common. After a while this student
invited him to his home,
' 'We have become warm friends,' concluded the Chinese.
'I have since spent many holidays -and week-ends at his home;
and on, leaving the university I shall know that one of my
fellow students at least will regretfully miss me.’ ”
"The Secretary of a railroad Young Men's Christian Asso-
ciation brought one evening into the building twelve Danes,
working On the railrpad who had no place to sleep. The Eng-
lish-speaking men, under the sway of racial antipathy, began
to object, and protested against the foreigners being brought in.
Among these newcomers, however, was a skilled musician who,
while the Americans were presenting their objections to the
secretary, began to play up on the accordian. He discoursed
^ sweet music, which soon had its effect. The ire on the faces of
the native-born soon began to vanish; the censure died on their
lips; their hearts were softened; and that night t^^ev sat up
late listening to the foreigner playing. ‘Peter Roberts, The
New Immigration. The Macmillan Co., 1922, p. 300.”
"There is a colony of Japanese in X, California. Several
years ago some real estate agents sought to sell a con'^iderable
amount of land to other Japanese, and the white people were
aroused at the thought of a great influx of these people. Meet-
ings were held, and a big sign was put up on the main boulevard
which 'read: ‘No Japanese wanted here.’
"The old resident Japanese of X, who had lived on good
terms with the white people, being members of their Farmers'
Association, went to the white people, and after consultation
finally agreed with them that a further increase in the Japanese
population would not be a good thing. Tlie sign was changed to
read: ‘No more Japanese wanted here.'
- "The person who tells th?s story contends that this action
advanced the solidarity of the communitv. and improved the
relations between the whites and the^Japanesc in that place*,
as witness the following:
"The Japanese of X, learning that the American church was
in financial difficulties, offered to give a definite amount yearly
for its support, in addition to carrying on their own Japanese
church work.”
NON-RESISTANCE TRUE AND FALSE
63
;
Now the first easily comes under true non-resistance. The
second is more an instance of presence of mind than non-resist-
ance. The third, from the facts as stated, is an instance, if not
of cowardice as jcontended by some of the debaters, certainly
of selfishness. The resident Japanese population, in order to
retain their earthly possessions, agreed to the prohibition of
further Japanese immigration. It may have been sound policy.
It may have been the only policy advisable. But it was not
non-resistance.
Non-resistance is restraint voluntarily undertaken for the
good of society. It is, therefore, an intensely active, purifying,
inward force. It is often antagonistic to the material good of
the non-resister- It "may even mean his utter material ruin.^
It is rooted in internal strength, never weakness. It must be
consciously exercised. It therefore presupposes ability to offer
physical resistance. In the last instance, therefore, the Japa-
nese would have non-resisted, if they had left all their posses-
sions rather than surrendered the rights of prospective immi-
grants. They might also have suffered death or lynching with-
out even mental retaliation and thus melted the hearts of their
persecutors. It was not victory of truth that without any in-
convenience to themselves they were able to retain their pro-
perty. In terms of non-resistance, their contribution to the
American Church in its difficulty was a bribe, by no means a
token of goodwill or a free gift.
The acquisition of the spirit of non-resistance is a matter of
long' training in self-denial and appreciation of the hidden
forces within ourselves. It changes one’s outlook upon life. It
puts different values upon things and upsets previous calcula-'
tions, and when once it is intensive enough can overtake the
whole universe. It is the greatest force because it is the highest
expression of the soul. All need not possess the same measure
of conscious non-resistance for its full operations. It is enough
for one person only to possess it, even as one general is enough
to rpgulate and dispose of the energy of millions of soldiers who
enlist under his banner, even though they know not the why
and the wherefore of his dispositions. The monkeys of one
Rama were enough to confound the innumerable hosts armed
from head to foot of the ten-headed Ravana.
Young India, 23-9-1926
26 ‘
STAND FOR NON-VIOLENCE
A friend sends me the following cutting from the New
York Nation:
“Some time ago (either in the latter part of 1924, or early
in 1925) a band of twenty-five American missionaries in ()hina
addressed the following appeal to the American Minister at
Peking:
‘The imdersigned American missionaries are in China as
messengers of the gospel of brotherhood and peace. Our task
is to lead men and women into a new life in Christ, which pro-
motes brotherhood and takes away all occasions of war. We
therefore express our earnest desire that no form of military
pressure, especially no foreign military force, be exerted to pro-
tect us or our property; and that, in the event of our capture
by lawless persons or our death at their hands, no money be
paid for our release, no punitive expedition be sent out, and-
no indemnities be exacted. We take this stand believing that
the way to establish righteousness and peace is through bringing
the spirit of personal goodwill to bear on all persons under all
circumstances, even through suffering wrong without retalia-
tion.’
‘The American Legation, however, replied that this petition
was inconsistent with the necessity that exists for safeguarding
Americans in China, and that therefore no exception could or
would be made in the procedure in case of emergencies with
regard to the signers of the petition.”
This is one of those instances in which two apparently con-
tradictory positions are right at the same time. For the brave
missionaries there was no other attitude possible, though now-
a-days very few adopt it. Was it not about China that a mis-
sionary deputation some thirty years ago waited on the late
Lord Salisbury and asked the protection of the British gun-
boats "for carrying their message to the unwilling Chinese?
Then the late^ noble Marquess had to tell the missionaries that,
if they sought the protection of the British arms, they n^ust
submit to international obligations ;and curb their missionary
ardour. He reminded them that the Christians of old, if thev
penetrated the remotest regions of the earth, expected no pro-
tection save from God and put their lives in constant danger.
04
STAND FOR NON-VIOLENCE
65
In the case quoted by the New York Nation, the missionaries,
according to the report, have reverted to the ancient practice.
The American Government, however, so long as it retains
its present character, can only give the answer they are report-
ed to have given. That the answer betrays the evil of the
modem system is another matter. The American prestige de-
pends not upon its mor^l strength but upon force. But why
should the whole armed force of America be mobilized for the
so-called vindication of its honour or name? What harm can
accrue to the honour of America if twenty-five missionaries
choose to go to China uninvited for the sake of delivering their
message and get killed in the act? Probably it would be the
best thing for their mission. The American Government by
its interference could only . interrupt the full working of the
law of suffering. But self-restraint of America would mean a
complete change of outlook. Today defence of citizenship is a
defence of national commerce, i.e., exploitation. That exploita-
tion presupposes the use of force for imposing commerce upon
an unwilling people. Nations have, in a sense, therefore, almost
become gangs of robbers, whereas they should be a peaceful
combination of men and women united for the common good of
mankind. In the latter case, their strength will lie not in their
skill in the use of gunpowder, but in the possession of superior ^
moral fibre. The action of the twenty-five missionaries is a dim
shadow of reconstructed society or even reconstructed nations.
I do not know whether they carried out their principle into
practice in every department of life- I need hardly point out
that, in spite of the threat of the American Government to pro-
tect them against themselves, they could neutralize, indeed even
frustrate; any effort at retaliation. But that means complete
self-effacement. And if one is to combat the fetish of force, it
will 'only be by means totally different from those in vogue
among the pure worshippers of brute force.
It must not be forgotten that after all there is a philosophy
behind the modern worship of brute force \vith a history to back
it. The microscopic non-militant minority has indeed nothing to
fear from it, if only it has immovable faith behind it. But faith
in the possibility of holding together society without brute force
seems somehow to be lacking. Yet if one person can pit him-
self against the whole world, why cannot two or more do like-
66
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
wise together? I know the answer that has been given. Time
alone can show the possibilities of the revolution that is silently
creeping upon us. Speculation is waste of effort where action is
already afoot. Those who have faith will join the initial effort
in which demonstrable results cannot be shown.
Young India, 21-10-1926
27
‘HUMANIZING WARM
I extract the following interesting paragraphs from an
article headed ‘War’ in the March Number of The Brotherhood:
“Last time the women and children were only 'starved— it
was done by a process cunningly disguised as 'economic pres-
sure* — but next time they are to be gassed to death. Aeroplanes
will drop penetrating poisons which will exterminate civil popu-
lation; Edison says that it should not be difidcult to dispose.of
London's millions in three hours. In every civilized country the
chemists are at work searching for some particularly deadly
poisons. In England, says Truth, our Government is busy ex-
perimenting with improvements in poison gas and killing
animals at the rate of two a day in the process. It obtained in
one year 689 cats, guinea pigs, goats, mice, monkeys, rabbits
and rats, and killed 618 of them with poison gas in search of
improvements.
“Some idea of the horrors of the next war may be gathered
from the fact that the range of g^s has been doubled since
the Armistice, and that machine guns are now available^ which
, fire, 1,500 shots a minute. An automatic cannon will fire one
and a quarter pound shells at the rate of 120 a minute, and there
is a sixteen-inch gun which hurls a missile weighing more than
a ton for a distance of twenty-seven miles. The Chemical
• Warfare Service in America has discovered a liquid, three drops
of .which when applied to any part of the skin will cause a
man’s death. One aeroplane, carrying two tons of this liquid,
could kill the whole population over miles of territory. General
S win ton of the British Army says; 'The great future weapon
of war will be deadly germs. We have since the war discovered
and developed germs which, dropped down upon cities and
armies, will slaughter a nation in a day.*
“If anyone is ever in danger of becoming unduly optimistic,
let him remember that we spent in 1924 forty millions on educa-
tion, a hundred and twenty-one millions on armaments, and
^HUMANIZING WARM
67
three hundred and sixteen millions on drink. The business of
scientific killing is very expensive, and I am told that nitrogen
thrown away in one small and indecisive battle in France would
have been enough to save India from a famine. The great world
powers are still pouring out an incredible amount of their
treasure upon armaments, although history so plainly teaches
that increasing armaments do nothing but increase the likeli-
hood of wars. Peace-loving America voted eighty-five million
dollars for aviation expansion in a few minutes, and no one took
the slightest notice of this forward movement in the race for
armaments. The irony of the situation is that, while Great
Britain is spending nearly twice as much money on armaments
today as she spent in 1913, the victorious nations have relieved
Germany of the burden of such expenditure, so that, in com-
peting with her in industry and commerce, they work under a
severe handicap of their own creation,”
I add to this the following from The Lancet June 18, 1927) :
”Since the arrival of the British troops there have been
many cases of influenza and pneumonia, but the question of
venereal disease has been the most clamant one, and in spite
of every possible precaution the number of those affected has
steadily increased ... A number of prostitutes from North and
South have flocked to Shanghai, most of them being Chinese
(6 per cent), Russians (30 per cent), and Japanese (5 per cent).
‘ The majority of the brothels are in the French Concession and
in Chinese districts bordering on municipal roads. The high
venereal rate has given the Command much concern, and no
stone is left unturned in the effort to lower it.”
And yet there are intelligent men who talk, and gullible
®^men who subscribe to the talk, of the ‘humanizing influence'
of war!
Young India, 11-8-1927
28
WAR AGAINST WAR
A correspondent writes:
“My excuse for writing this is that the autobiographical
chapter about your attitude towards war as a follower of Truth
and Ahimsa has apparently stirred the thoughts of many, and
abler people would be writing to you about it. But I wish to
present some aspects that have struck me. 'Is it not a funda-
mental doctrine that to the true discipline of Truth and Ahivtsa
there can be no tampering with bad things even though one
cannot resist them? War is a necessary evil as some say, but
that is no excuse for supporting it in the hope that after it
there will come to the world a realization of the wickedness of
waging war. It cannot be. On the contrary, the callousness of
mantis increased further in intensity and the feeling about
the sacredness of life is destroyed. The anarchist could argue
just as you do and say; ‘We cannot stop European aggression
and terrorism. We cannot resist terrorism by mass force. But
if we can only demonstrate to them the wickedness of such
methods by using these against them, they will see the folly of
their attitude and we shall become free, and we shall also save'
the world from terrorism. So long as Mmsa is resorted to by
our rulers and so long as we hate terrorism what is the harm
in using these weapons, provided we do not allow them to
obsess us?* Has the Great War actually done any good to the
nations and particularly to the victors? Materially, morally
and socially they have lost heavily as a result of the victory.^
Their moral standards have all been upset, and the strife after
the life of the movement, and the disregard for truth and
honesty in international dealings is becoming more and more
apparent every day. Can any good come out of a war, however
‘righteous’ it may be? Are we not bound to oppose it and invite
suffering for the cause rather than in any way acquiesce in it
either passively or actively? Do you ‘not believe that the paci-
fists served the cause better than those who actively engaged
in the War? What you say might represent the state of your
mind in 1914 when you thought there was a sense of justice in
the British mentality. Do you now feel that it was right? If
another war were declared tomorrow, would you volunteer your
help to England in the hope that you would be making things
better after the war? I know I have not presented the case in
the best » way, but you can understand what it is that I am
trying to tell you, and I shall be glad to have reply.”
C8
WAR AGAINST WAR
69
I agree with the correspondent that he has not presented his
case ‘in the best way’, but he does represent a type of readers
who will not read carefully even writings that are meant to
be serious, simply because they happen to be found in a weekly
journal. If readers like the correspondent will re-read the
chapter in question, they will be able to deduce from it that
1. I did not offer my services because I believed in war.
I offered them because I could not avoid participation in it at
least indirectly.
2. I had no status to resist participation.
3. I do not believe that war can be avoided by taking part
in it, even as I do not believe that evil can be avoided by parti-
cipation in it. This, however, needs to be distinguished from
sincerely helpless participation in many things we hold to be
evil or undesirable.
4. The anarchist’s argument is irrelevant as his partici-
pation in terrorism is deliberate, voluntary and preconceived.
5. The War certainly did not do good to the so-called
victors.
6. The pacifist f esisters who suffered imprisonment certainly
served the cause of peace.
7.. If another war were declared tomorrow, I could not, with
my present views about the existing Government, assist it in
any shape -or form; on the contrary I should exert myself to the
utmost to induce others to withhold their assistance and to do
everything possible and consistent with Ahimsa to bring about
its defeat.
Young India, 8-3-1928
29
STILL AT IT
The autobiographical chapter dealing with my participation
in the last war^ continues to puzzle friends and critics. Here
is one more letter:
“In Chapter 38, Part IV, of your Autobiography you, for
the first time, broached the question of your participation in
the war of 1914-1918.
Certain points troubled me, but I waited, anxiously hoping
to see the subject more fuUy developed in the next chapter, as
also probably by correspondence.
This has to some extent happened. But still there are two
points which have not been elucidated to the extent I had
hoped.
I am not writing to you with the idea that you arc in the
wrong, but with the conviction that I have not been able to
grasp your full meaning; and as there must be many others
in my position, I am emboldened to ask of you the elucidation for
which I long.
Tlie first point is: What actually impelled you to partici-
pate in the war? You say "One of the three courses was open
to me; I could declare open resistance against the war and,
in accordance with the law of Satyagraha, boycott the Empire
until it changed its military policy; or I could seek imprison-
ment by civil disobedience of such of its laws as were fit to be
disobeyed; or I could participate in the war on the side of the
Empire and thereby acquire the capacity and the fitness for
resisting the violence of war. I lacked this capacity and fitness;
so I thought there was nothing for it but for me to serve in the
war.'
«
What capacity and fitness for resisting the violence of the
war was it that you hoped to acquire by participating in the
war? ‘
I can see that your case was individual and quite different
from that of the natives of the various belligerent countries.
You were not liable, as they were, to be recruited for active
service, and 'passive resistance was not therefore naturally open
to you. Then to make pifblic pi:otest' against the war, when you
had no status with which to back it, would have been worse than
♦ Chapter 10 in this volume.
70
STILL AT IT
71
useless. But why take on one iota more of helpless participa^
tion than was absolutely necessary?
Though from the foregoin,g quotation one gathers that
you joined the war in order to acquire the capacity to resist the
violence of war, yet in other places you clearly state that you
hoped, by your action, to gain some status for yourself and
your country — not merely for resisting war — one concludes.
And out of this comes the second question: was it right to
join the war with the hope of gaining anything?
I do not know how to reconcile this with the teaching of
the Gita which says that we should never act with a view to
the fruits of our action. ^
Throughout the chapter you used the argument of aiding or
biot aiding the British Empire, and I realize that the question,
as originally broached, was an individual one. But it inevitably
leads us on to the question: should we or should we not partici-
pate in war as war?”
No doubt it was a mixed motive that prompted me to parti-
cipate in the war. Two things I can recall. Though as an indi-
vidual I was opposed to war, I had no status for offering effect-
ive non-violent resistance. Non-violent resistance can only fol-
low some real disinterested service, some heart-expression of
love. For instance, I would have no status to resist a savage
offering animal sacrifice until he could recognize in me his friend
through some loving act of mine or other means. I do not sit
in judgment upon the world for its many misdeeds. Being im-
perfect myself and needing toleration and charity, I tolerate the
world’s imperfections fill I find or create an opportunity for
fruitful expostulation. I felt that, if by sufficient service I could
attain the power and the confidence to resist the Empire’s wars
and its warlike preparations, it would be a good thing for me,
who was seeking to enforce non-violence in my own life, to
test the extent to which it was possible among the masses.
The other motiv^e was to qualify for Swaraj through the
good offices of the statesmen of the Fmpire. I could not thus
qualify myself except through serving the Empire in its life
and death struggle. It must be understood that I am writing
of my mentality in 1914 when I was a believer in the Empire
and its willing ability to help India in her battle for freedom.
Had I been the non-violent rebel that I am today, I should cer-
tainly not have helped, but through every effort open to non-
violence I should have attempted to defeat its purpose.
72
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
My opposition to and disbelief in war was as strong then as
it is today. But we have to recognize that there are many
things in the world which we do although we may be against
doing them. I am as much opposed to taking the life of the low-
est creature alive as I am to war. But I continually take such
life, hoping some day to attain the ability to do without this
fratricide. To entitle me, in spite of it, to be called a votaiy of
non-violence, my attempt must be honest, strenuous and un-
ceasing. The conception of moksha, absolution from the need
to have embodied existence, is based upon the necessity of
perfected men and women being completely non-violent. Pos-
session of a body like every other possession necessitates some
violence, be it ever so little. The fact is that the path of duty
is not always easy to discern amidst claims seeming to conflict
one vnth the other.
Lastly, the verse referred to from the Gita has a double
meaning. One is that there should be no selfish purpose behind
our actions. That of gaming ^ Swaraj is not selfish purpose.
Secondly, to be detached from fruits of actions is not to be •
ignorant of them, or to disregard or disown them. To be de-
tached is never to abandon action because the contemplated
result may not follow. On the contrary, it is proof of immov-
able faith in the certainty of the contemplated result foUovang
in due course.
Young India, 15-3-1928
30
MY ATTITUDE TOWAKDS WAR
Rev. B. De Ligt has written in a French journal called
Evolution a long open letter to me. He has favoured me with
a translation of it. The open letter strongly criticises my parti-
cipation in the Boer War and then the Great War of 1914, and
invites me to explain my conduct in the light of AMmsa. Other
friends too have put the same question. I have attempted to
give the explanation more than once in these columns.
There is no defence for my conduct weighed only in the
scales of Ahimsa. 1 draw no distinction between those who wield
the v/eapons of destruction and those who do Red Cross work.
Both participate in war and advance its cause. Both are guilty
of the crime of war. But even after introspection during all
these years, I feel that, in the circumstances in which I found
myself, I was bound to adopt the course I did both during the
Boer War and the Great European War and for that matter the
so-called Zulu /Rebellion’ of Natal in 1906.
Life is governed by a multitude of forces. It would be
smooth sailing, if one could determine the course of one’s actions
only by one general principle whose application at a given
moment was too obvious to need even a moment’s reflection.
But I cannot recall a single act which could be so easily deter-
mined.
Being a confirmed war resister I have never given myself
training in the use of destructive weapons in spite of opportuni-
ties to take such training. It was perhaps thus that I escaped
direct destruction of human life. But so long as I lived under
a system of government based on force and voluntarily partook
of the many facilities and privileges it created for me, I was
bound to help that Government to the extent of my ability
when it was engaged in a war, unless I non-cooperated with
that Government and renounced to the utmost of my capacity
the privileges it offered me.
Let me take an illustration. I am a member of an institu-
tion which holds a few acres of land whose crops are in immi-
nent peril from monkeys. 'I believe in the sacredness of all
life, and hence I regard it as breach of Ahirnsa to inflict any
73
74
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
injury on the monkeys. But I do not hesitate to instigate and
direct an attack on the monkeys in order to save the crops. I
would like to avoid this evil. I can avoid it by leaving or break-
ing up the institution. I do not do so because I do not expect
to be able to find a society where there will be no agriculture
and therefore no destruction of some life. In fear and trembling,
in humility and penance, I therefore participate in the injury
inflicted on the monkeys, hoping some- day to find a way out.
Even so did I participate in the three acts of war. I could
not, it would be madness for me to, sever my connection with
the society to which I ‘belong. And on those three occasions;
I had no thought of non-cooperating with the British Govern-
ment. My position regarding that Government is totallj)" differ-
ent today, and hence I should not voluntarily participate in its
war, and I should risk imprisonment and even the gallows, if
I was forced to take up arms or otherwise take part in its
military operations.
■ But that still does not solve the riddle. If there was a;
national Government, whilst I should not take any direct part
in any war, I can conceive occasions when it would be my duty •
to vote for the military training of those who wish to take it.
For I know that all its members do not believe in non-violence
to the extent I do. It is not possible to make a person or a
society non-violent by compulsion.
Non-violence works in a most mysterious manner. Often a
man’s actions defy analysis in terms of non-violence; equally
often his actions may wear the appearance of violence when he
is absolutely non-violent in the highest sense of the term and
is subsequently found so to be. All I can then claim for my
conduct is that it was, in the instances cited, actuated in the
interests of non-violence. There was no thought - of sordid
national or other interest. I do not believe in the promotion of
national or any .other interest at the sacrifice of some other
interest.
I may not carry my argument any further. Language at best
is but a poor vehicle for expressing one’s thoughts in full. For
me non-violence is not a mere philosophical principle. It is
the rule and the breath of my life. I know I fail often, some-
times consciously, more often unconsciously. It is a matter
‘WHAT ARE WE TO DO?’
75
not of the intellect but of the heart. True guidance cpmes by
constant waiting upon God, by utmost humility, self-abnegation,
by being ever ready to sacrifice one’s self. Its practice requires
fearlessness and courage of the highest order. I am painfully
aware of my failings.
But the Light within me is steady and clear. There is no
escape for any of us save through Truth and non-violence. I
know that war is wrong, is an unmitigated evil. I know too
that it has got to go. I firmly believe that freedom won through
bloodshed or fraud is no freedom. Would that all the acts
alleged against me were found to be wholly indefensible rather
than that by any act of mine non-violence was held to be com-
promised or that I was ever thought to be in favour of violence
or untruth in any shape or form. Not violence, not untruth,
but non-violence. Truth is the law of our being.
Young India, 13-9-1928
31
‘WHAT ARE WE TO DO?’
Two weeks ago I wrote in Navajivan a note on the tragedy
in Godhra, where Shri Purushottam Shah bravely met his death
at the hands of his assailants, and gave the note the heading
‘Hindu Muslim Fight in Godhra’, Several Hindus did not like
the .heading and addressed angry letters asking me to correct
it. I found it impossible to accede to their demand. Whether
there is one victim or more, whether one assumes the offensive
and the other simply suffers^ I should describe the event as a
fight, if the whole Series of happenings were the result of a state
of war between the two communities. Whether in Godhra or
in other places there is today a state of war between the two
communities. Fortunately the countryside is still free from
the war-fever which is mainly confined to towns and cities
where, in some form or other, fighting is continually going on.
Even the correspondents who have written to me about Godhra
do not seem to deny the fact that the happenings arose out of
the communaL antagonisms that existed there.
76
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
If the correspondents had siniply addressed themselves to
the heading, I should have satisfied myself with writing to them
privately and written^nothing in Navajivan about it. But there
are other letters in which the correspondents have vented their
ire on different counts. A volunteer from Ahmedabad who had
been to Godhra writes:
"You say that you must be silent over these quarrels. Why
were you not sileiit over the Khilafat, and why did you exhort
us to join the Muslims? Why are you not silent about your
principles of Ahirnsa? How can you justify your silence when
the two communities are running at each other’s throat and
the Hindus are being crushed to atoms? How does Ahimsa come
there? I invite your attention to two cases:
A Hindu shopkeeper thus complained to me: 'Mussalmans
purchase bags of rice from my shop, often never paying for
them. I cannot insist on payment for fear of their looting my
godowns. I have, therefore, to make an involuntary gift of
about 50 to 75 maunds of rice every month.’
Others complained: ‘Mussalmans invade our quarters and
insult our women in our presence, and we have to sit still. If
v/e dare to raise a protest, we are done for. We dare not even
lodge a complaint against them.’
What would you advise in such cases? How would you
bring your Ahimsa into play? Or even here would you prefer
to remain silent?”
These and similar questions have been answered in these
pages over and over again, but as they are still raised, I had
better explain my views once more at the risk of repetition.
Ahimsa is not the way of the timid or* the cowardly. It is
the way of the brave ready to face death. He who perishes
sword in hand is no doubt brave, but he who faces death with-
out raising his little finger and without flinching is braver. But
he who surrenders his rice bags for fear of being beaten is a
coward and no votary of Ahimsa. He is innocent of Ahimsa.
He who, for fear of being beaten, suffers the women of his
household to be insulted, is not manly but just the reverse. He
is fit to be neither a husband nor a father nor a brother. Such
people have no right to complain.
These cases have nothing to do with the inveterate enmity
between the Hindus and Mussalmans. Where there are fools
there are bound to be knaves, where there are cowards there are
bound to be bullies, whether they are Hindus or Mussalmans.
*WHAT ARE WE TO DO?’
77
Such cases used to happen even before the outbreak of these-
communal hostilities. The question here, therefore, is not how
to teach one of the two communities a lesson or how to humanize
it, but how to teach a coward to be brave.
!
If the thinking sections of both the communities realize
the cowatdice and folly at the back of the hostilities, we can
easily end them. Both have to be brave, both have to be wise.
If both or either deliberately get wise, theirs will be the way
of non-violence. If both fight and learn wisdom only by bitter
experience, the way will be one of violence. Either way there
is no room for cowards in a society of men, i.e., in a society
which loves freedom. Swaraj is not for cowards.
It is idle, therefore, to denounce Ahimsa or to be angry
with me on the strength of the cases cited. Ever since my ex-
perience of the distortion of Ahimsa in Bettiah in 1921 I have
been repeating over and over again that he who cannot protect
himself or his nearest and dearest or their honour by non-
violently facing death, may and ought to do so by violently
dealing with the oppressor. He who can do neither of the two is
a burden. He has no business to be the head of a family. He
must either hide himself, or must rest content to live for ever
in helplessness and be prepared to crawl like a worm at the
'bidding of a bully.
I know only one way — ^the way of Ahimsa. The way of
himsa goes against my grain. I do not want to cultivate the
power to inculcate himsa. As Ahimsa has no place in the at-
mosphere of cowardice prevailing today, I must needs be reti-
cent over the riots we hear of from day to day. This exhibi-
tion of my helplessness cannot be to my liking. But God never
ordains that only things that we like should happen and things
that we do not like should not happen. « In spite of the helpless-
the faith sustains me that He is the Help of the helpless, that
He comes to one’s succour only when one throws himself on
His mercy. It is because of this faith that I cherish the hope
that God will one day show me a path which I may confidently
commend to the people. With me the conviction is as strong as
ever that willynilly Hindus and Mussalmans must be friends
one day. No one can say how and when that will happen. The
future is entirely in the hands of God. But He has vouchsafed
78
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
to US the ship of Faith which alone can enable us to cross the
ocean of Doubt.
Younp India, 11-10-1928
32
^MY ATTITUDE TOWARDS WAR’
My article under the above heading, published in Young
India, 13th September 1928, has given rise to much correspon-
dence with me and in the European press that is interested in
war against war. In the personal correspondence there is a
letter from Tolstoy’s friend and follower, V, Tcherkoff, which,
coming as it does from one who commands great respect among
lovers of peace, the reader will like me to share with him. Here
is the letter:
'Your Russian friends send you their warmest greetings
and best wishes for the further success of your devoted service
for God and men. With the liveliest interest do we follow your
life, the work of your mind, and your activity, and we rejoice
at each of your success. We realize that all that you attain ih
your own country is at the same. time also our attainment, for,
although under different circumstances, we are serving the
one and the same cause. We feel a great gratitude to you for
all that you have given and are giving us by your person, the
example of your life, and your fruitful social work. We feel
the deepest and most joyous spiritual union with you/
But the truer and the deeper is the union, the more acutely
onk feels the least difference or misunderstanding between us.
And it is just such a misunderstanding between us that has
elicited my present letter to you.
Your article ‘My Attitude Towards War,* printed in Young
India of the 13tK September of this year, has grieved many of
your admirers and friends. And I have felt the need of ex-
pressing that which 1 feel and think on this subject. I hope
that you will accept my words with the same feeling of good-
will with which they issue from me.
"/You justify youn past participation In three wars waged by
the British Government. Alluding to the same subject some
years ago you in an article expressed yourself, if I remember
right, in another spirit.' Then you did not justify yourself, but
recognized your former inconsistency. And I remember that
this readiness of yours to recognize your past mistake greatly
*MY ATTITUDE TOWARDS WAR*
79
touched and consoled me and your other friends here. Where-
as now, on the contrary, you justify yourself, referring to the
usuaL arguments put forward in defence of war. You say: Tafe
is governed by a multitude of forces. It would be smooth sail-
ing, if one could determine the course of one's actions only by
one general principle whose application at a given moment was
too obvioils to need even a moment's reflection.' This is quite
correct with regard to all cases which admit of considerations
of practical expediency. But there is a "category of actions,
which owing to their character do not admit of such consi-
derations. They are such actions which for us clearly violate a
definitely recognized moral or divine law. To this category of
actions belongs the wilful killing of man. In this case the issue
should be placed categorically, and one should not allow any
considerations of expediency to interfere.
Neither may one solve this question according to whether
one ^mpathizes or not with a given Government. And yet
you do so when you say: Tf there was a national Government,
I can conceive occasions when it would be my duty to vote for
the military training of those who wish to take it.' In this way
you justify others who also vote for the preparation for war
because they sympathize with another Government. And what
a snare is placed in people's way by a man who denies war to
such an extent that he refuses to serve in the army and who
at the same time votes for military training?
Further you say that ‘all its (the Government's) members
do not believe in non-violence,' and. that ‘it is not possible to
make a person or a society non-violent by compulsion.’ But by
abstaining from voting for military training I compel no one
to do anything, just as by refraining from voting for training
pickpockets I do no violence to pickpockets.
You refer to the example of a harvest eaten by monkeys.
But by transferring the case from^men to monkeys you obscure
it. If your harvest were attacked by men not beasts, would
you' not deem it your duty to sacrifice the harvest rather than
destroy the men?
You say that it would be madness for you to sever your con-
nection with the society to which you belong, and that long
as you lived under a system of government based on force, and
yoluntarily partook of the many facilities and privileges it
created for you, you were bound to help it to the extent of
your ability when it was engaged in war.
Firstly, by abstaining from approving those evil deeds which
men are engaged in around me I not only do not ‘sever my con-
nection with the society to which I belong,’ but exactly the
opposite. I utilize this connection for the best possible way of
serving this society.
80
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR ^
Secondly, if living as I live I am obliged to assist the State
in waging war, then I ought at all costs to cease to live as I
live, even if I had in doing so to sacrifice my life, and in no
v/ise to help people in the slaughter of their brothers. Besides,,
it ' is quite possible to make use of certain facilities afforded
by the State, which could be obtained without violence, and at
the same time to abstain from supporting the evil deeds of the
State.
Perhaps the misunderistanding partly arises from your not
having sufficiently rigidly drawn the line between violence and
killing. There are cases when it is indeed difficult, without
careful consideration, to make clear whether definite violence
is being committed. But in the question of war there is no
room for doubt as to its being founded on the killing of man.
In this we probably agree.
We hope, dear and greatly esteemed friend, that you will
recognize the justice of the considerations I have expressed,
and that you will give us an explanation that will quiet our
misgivings. At all events believe me that I would not have
written this letter, had not the passages indicated in your article
indeed called forth misgivings among many of your sincere and
earnest friends.
In conclusion, I may only reiterate the expression of my
deepest regard for you and my warmest good wishes for yourself
and your good work.”
I need hardly assure M. Tcherkoff that not only do I not
resent his letter but I welcome it for its warmth of affection
and for its transparent sincerity.
I do not propose to enter into a detailed reply to the points
raised in the letter. For me the matter does not admit of
reasoning beyond a point. It is one of deep conviction that war
is an unmixed evil. I would not yield to anyone in my detesta-
tion of war. But conviction is one thing, correct practice is
another. The very thing that one war resister may do in the
interest of his mission may repel another war resister who
may do .the exact opposite, and yet both may hold the same
view about war. This contradiction arises because of the be-
wildering, complexity of human nature. I can only, therefore,
plead for mutual toleration even among professors of the same
creed.
Now for some points in the letter. I do not recall the writing
or speech in which I expressed repentance for mj^ participa-
tion in Britain’s wars. What I am likely to have said is that
•1AY ATTITUDE TOWARDS WAR’
81
I was not sorry that I aided Britain though her policy was
afterwards discovered by me to have been one fraught with
harm to India and danger to humanity. If I had felt remorse
for having taken part in the three wars as wars, I should have
remembered it and repeated it unless I had changed my opi-
nion about my participation.
Whatever I have done was not done from expedience as
we understand the term. I claim to have done every act des-
cribed by me for the purpose of advancing the cause of peace.
That does not mean that those acts really advanced the cause
of peace. I am merely stating the fact that my motive was peace.
"What is possible, however, is that I was then weak and am
still too weak to perceive my error even as a'blind man is un-
able to see what his neighbours are able to see. I observe daily
how capable we are of utmost self-deception.
For the time being, however, I am not aware of my self-
deception. "What I feel is that I am looking at peace through a
medium to which my European friends are strangers. I belong
to a country which is compulsorily disarmed and has been held
under subjection for centuries. My way of looking at peace
may be necessarily different from theirs.
• Let 'me take an illustration. Supposing that -"both cats and
mice sincerely desire peace. Now cats will have to adjure war
against mice. But how wiU mice, promote peace? What will
they abjure? Is their vote even necessary? Suppose fur,ther
that some cats do not observe that pact arrived at by the
assembly of cats and continue preying upon mice, what will
mice do? There may be some wise heads among them, and
they may say, ‘We will offer ourselves a willing sacrifice till
the cats are over-satisfied and find no fun in preying.’ These
will do well to propagate their cult. But what should be their
attitude, peace-lovers though they are, towards the mice who
would, instead of running away from their oppressors, decide
to arm themselves and give battle to the enemy? The effort
may be vain, but the wise mice whom I have imagined wiU, I
apprehend, be boimd to assist the mice in their desire to be-
come bold and strong even whilst . maintaining their attitude
of peace. They will do so' hot out of policy but from the high-
est of motives. That is exactly my ^attitude. Non-violence is
e > .
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AITO WAR
82 ■
not an easy thing to understand, still less to practise, weak as
we are. We must all act prayerfully and humbly and conti-
nually ask God to open the eyes of our understalfding, being
ever ready to act according to the light as we receive it. My
task as a lover and promoter of peace, therefore, today consists
in unflinching devotion to non-violence in the prosecution of
the campaign for regaining our liberty. And if India succeeds
in so regaining it, it will be the greatest contribution to^he
world’s peace. European war resisters, therefore, may well
formulate public opinion in Europe that will compel Britain to
retrace her steps and stop the continuing spoliation of India.
Young India, 7-2-1929
33
SWORD v. SPIRIT
• /
A friend sends the following interesting extract from an
old number of My Magazine:
'"No conqueror ever gained more by wars than did Napoleon,
Emperor of the French, who, beginning as a poor Corsican
j Lieutenant, for a little while dominated Europe, altering boun-
daries, upsetting thrones. Yet Napoleon knew that it was folly
to rely on force. 'There are only two powers in the world,* he
' said, not after he had been defeated and exiled, but while he
appeared to be at the height of his success; 'those powers are
. the spirit and the sword. In the long run the sword will
. always he conquered hy the splriV
• But why, we may ask, did Napoleon, if he saw so plainly
1 the uselessness of war, continue to make war? Why did he
use the sword until it was wrenched out of his hand at Water-
loo? Partly because Napoleon, like the rest of us, could not
always practise what he preached, but partly because other kings
' and emperors would not let him alone. They were not as wise
as he. When he pleaded for peace they would not believe he
was. sincere. To the Emperor of Austria after a fierce battle
1 he addressed this personal appeal:
'Thousands of Frenchmen and Austrians have been killed.
^ . The prospect of continuance of such horrors distresses me so
' ^ greatly that I make a personal appeal to you. Amid grief and/
surrounded by 15,000 corpses, I implore Your Majesty, I feel
i abound to give you an urgent warning. You are far from the
I
FOR CONSCIENCE SAKE
83
scene, your heart cannot be so deeply moved as mine is on the
spot.
‘Let us give our generation peace and tranquillity. If the
men of the later days are such fools as to come to blovJ^s, they
will learn wisdom after a few years of fighting and will then
live at peace with one another.* **
Would that India, which through her Congress has sub-
tscribed to the policy of non-violence, will adhere to it and de-
monstrate to a world groaning under the curse of the sword
that the spirit does triumph over the sword in national affairs
as it has ever been shown to have triumphed in individual
-affairs.
Young India, 14-2-1929
34 '
FOR CONSCIENCE SAKE
Pax International is a monthly journal issued at Geneva,
12 rue de Vieux-College, on behalf of the Women’s International
X^eague for Peace and Freedom. I have before me a copy of the
November number of this monthly which has the following
paragraph:
“In Jugoslavia 72 members of the religious body of Nazar^
enes have been condemned by the military court of .the Save,
District to 10 years’ imprisonment for refusing to take up arms.
All of the condemned have already served 5 years’ imprison-
ment for the same offence. All friends of peace in the whole
world should protest against these inhuman sentences • and
demand the revision of the sentence.”
It is a remarkable awakening in the Western world, this
peace movement. That 10 years’ servitude for the mere refusal to
take up arms is possible under a system in respect of 72 honour-
able men who follow the law of love rather than the law of
Tiate which the system promulgates is proof of its barbarity.
Whether the world conscience disapproves of these savage
sentences or no‘t and whether such disapproval produces an
effect on the Jugoslavian Government or not, it is certain that
the system must be at its last gasp that needs for its sustenance
the infliction of barbarous sentences on innocent and honourable
84
NON-VIOUSNCE IN PEACE AND WAR
citizens. I tender my respectful congratulations to the brave
Nazarenes whom, let me hope, the conscience of Jugoslavia itself,
will not allow to lie buried in its goals for 10 long years.
Young India, 14-2'1925
35
WOMEN AND WAR
An effective movement against war is making steady head-
way in the. West, and the women of the West are playing a
most important, if not the leading, part in the movement The
Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom issued
at its conference at Frankfort-on-Main held on January 4th
the following telling appeal:
“Formerly war only raged over limited areas; the evil was
localized;
Today a war once started spreads everywhere.
Formerly only one area was involved in fear and danger;
Today the whole world is ‘Balkanized’, fires blaze up front
various centres all at once in all parts of the world. ,
Never ‘has war threatened the world in more terrible form;
Never has war threatened such vast surfaces of the world;
Never has it threatened such innumerable populations' as
are threatened by modern methods of war.
It is no longer a question of conflicts between mercenn.ries;
It is no longer a question of battles involving mobilized
young men;
Entire peoples are threatenedl
Do they know what a new war would be with the methods
of destruction offered by science from now on which are every
day perfected? :
Do they know that the airplanes without pilots, steered by
radio and carrying poison gas, bombs and incendiaxy bombs
can, in a few minutes, destroy simultaneously great cities like
London, Paris, Berlin?
Do they know that poison gases not only destroy human
beings, sometimes like a thunderbolt, sometimes after -long
and terrible sufferings, but also that they penetrate the depths
' of the earth and poison water and everything underground?
WOMEN AND WAR
85
Do they know that the ihcendiary bombs can, by chemical
combination, produce a temperature of 1,000 degrees which
would secure the annihilation of everything which by a miracle
might have escaped destruction by gas? ‘
Do they realize that a new war would thus be a war of the
simultaneous extermination of peoples, and would imperil the
whole of civilization?
Now, if the race in armaments continues, leading, as it does,
all States to ruin, nothing can prevent a new conflict from
breaking out.
It is a duty to make known to the masses the extent and
gravity of the danger that threatens them.
It is a duty to show them the futility of all the measures of
protection against chemical and bacteriological methods of
destruction perfected by science for use in war.
Proposals for disarmament have been made since 1927 by
' the U.S.S.R.
The » Pact for the ^-Renunciation of War^ has been signed by
a large number of States.
The logical conclusion of this renunciation
can only be disarmament.
And it is the only way to avoid fresh wars.
If, with us, you are convinced,
Insure the success of the campaign we have undertaken, by
giving us your moral support by the help of your name, if you
cannot help us in a more active way.
And by material help according to your means.”
We are too poor to give any material support. Moreover
'we are not a nation to take part in any war. Till we come .to
-our own, we shall have to be victims of the war that may come
upon the world. But it is possible to render more than moral
.and material support to the movement, that is by regaining our
freedom not by warlike means but by non-violent means. I
suggest to the friends of peace for the world 'that the Congress
in 1920 took a tremendous step towards peace when it declar^
that it would attain her own, namely Swaraj, by non-violent
and truthful means. And I am positive that, if we unflinchingly
adhere to these means in the prosecution of our goal, we shall
have made the largest contribution to the world peace.
Young India, 21-3-1929
36
A COMPLEX PROBLEM
It is not without diffidence that I approach the question'
raised by Rev. B. de Ligt in his open letter to me with regard
to my attitude towards war/^ To remain silent at the risk of
being misunderstood is an easy way out of the difficult situation
I find myself in. To say that I made a mistake in participating
in war on the occasions in question would be easier still. But it
would be unfriendly not to answer questions put in the friend-
liest manner; and I must not pretend repentance when I do not
feel it. My anxiety to avoid a discussion of the question does
not proceed from want of conviction, but it proceeds from the
fear that I may not be able to make my meaning clear, and
may thus create an impression about my attitude towards war
which I do not desire. Often do I find language to be a poor
vehicle for expressing some of my fundamental sentiments. I
would, therefore, urge Mr. B. de Ligt^and other fellow war-re-
sisters not to mind my faulty or incomplete argument and still
less to mind my participation in war which they may be unable
to reconcile with my professions about war. Let them under-
stand me to be uncompromisingly against all war. If they
cannot appreciate my argument, let them impute my partici-
pation to unconscious weakness. For I would feel extremely
sorry to discover that my action was used by anyone to justify
war under certain conditions. ^
But haying said this much I must adhere to the position
taken up in the articlef which is the subiect matter of Mr.
de Ligt’s* letter. Let the European war-resisters appreciate one
vital difference between them and me. They do not represent
exploited nations; I represent the most exploited nation on earth.
To use an unflattering comparison, they represent the cat and
I represent the mouse. Has a mouse even the sense of non-
violence? Is it not a fundamental want with him to strive to
offer successful violence before he can be taught to appreciate
the \drtue, the grandeur, the supremacy, of the law of non-viol-
ence— Ahimsa— in the field of war? May it not be necessary
* Given a'? appendix,
t Sec Chapter 30.
SG
COMPLEX PROBLEM
87
for me, as a representative of the mouse tribe, to participate in
my principaFs desire for wreaking destruction even for the pur-
pose of teaching him the superiority of non-destruction?
Here the analogy of the cat and the mouse ends. The "mouse
has no capacity in him to alter his nature. A human being,
however debased or fallen he may be, has in him the capacity
of rising to the greatest height ever attained by any human being
irrespective of race or colour. Therefore, even whilst I may go
with thy countrymen a long way in satisfying their need for
preparation for war, I should do so in the fullest hope of wean-
ing them from war and of their seeing one day its utter futility.
Let it be remembered that the largest experiment known to
history in mass non-violence is being tried by me even as I seem
to be lending myself for the purpose of war. For want of skill
the experiment may fail. But the war-resister in Europe should
strain every nerve to understand and appredate the pheno-
menon going on before him in India of the same man trying
the bold experiment in non-violence whilst hobnobbing with
those who would prepare for war.
It is part of the plan of non-violence that I should share the
feelings of my countrymen if I would ever expect to bring them
to non-violence. The striking fact is that India including the
educated politician is nolens volens driven to the belief that
non-violence alone will free the masses from the thraldom of
centuries. It is true that all have not followed out the logical
consequences of non-violence. Who can In spite of my boast
that I know the truth of non-violence and try my best to
practise it, I fail often to follow out the logical conclusions of
the doctrine. The working of nature’s processes in the human
breast is mysterious .and baffles interpretation.
This I know that, if India comes to her own demonstrably
through non-violent means, India will never want to carry a
vast army, an equally grand navy, and a grander air force. If
her self-consciousness rises to the height necessary to give her
a non-violent victory in her fight for freedom, the world values
will have changed and most of the paraphernalia of war would
be found to be useless. Such an India may be a mere day-
dream, a childish folly. But such, in my opinion, is undoubtedly
the implication of an India becoming free through non-violence.
88
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
When th^t freedom comes, if it ever does, it will have come
through a gentlemanly imderstanding with Great Britain. But
then it will not be an imperialistic haughty Britain manoeuvr-
ing for world supremacy, but a Britain humbly trying to serve
the common end of humanity/ India mil no longer then be
* helplessly driven into Britain’s wats of exploitation, but hers
will be the voice of a powerful nation seeking to keep under
restraint all the violent forces of the world.
Whether aU these fanciful ideas are ever realized or not,
my own life line is cast. I can no longer, in any conceivable
circumstance, take part 'in Britain’s wars. And I have already
said in these pages that, if India attains (what will be to me
so-called) freedom by violent means, she will cease to be a
country of my pride; that time will be a time for me of civil
death. There can, therefore, never be any question of my parti-
cipation, direct or indirect, in any war of exploitation by India.
But I have already pointed out in these pages that fellow
war-resisfers in the West are participants in war even in peace
time inasmuch as they pay for the preparations that are being
made for it and otherwise sustain governments whose main
occupation is such preparation. Again, all activity for stopping
v/ar must prove fruitless so long as the causes of war are not
understood and radically dealt with. Is not the prime cause of
modern wars the inhuman race for exploitation of the so-called
weaker races of the earth?
Young India, 9-*5-1929f
37
THE KELLOGG PACT
“In Young India for March 2l5t was printed an appeal
issued at the recent Conference of the Women's International
League for Peace and Freedom, in which occurs the following
passage: ‘The Pact for the “renunciation of war" has been •
signed by a large number of States. The logical conclusion of
•this renunciation can only be disarmament. And it is ^ the only
way to avoid fresh war.' It is possible that some of the readers
of Young India are not fully conversant with the genesis of this
Pact, the Kellogg Pact as it is often called, and with its tre-
mendous possibilities. So the following very sketchy outline
may not be out of place.
It is the outcome of a movement for the outlawry of war
which was beguti in the TJ. S. A. by Mr. S. O. Levinson in 1920,
and has been gradually but steadily gaining strength. Senator
Borah, a man of exceptional ability and power, has been, so to
speak, Mr. Levinson's representative in the IT. S. A. Senate, and
in 1923 hd brought in a resolution of which the general purport
was that the U. S. A. should invite all the civilized nations of
the world to join her in a universal treaty outlawing war by
declaring it an international crime. It was at first hardly
treated with any seriousness, .but the Outlav^ry Committee
X founded by Mr. Levinson was steadily educating public opinion,
so that each time Mr. Borah called the attention of the Senate '
to his resolution, it was treated more seriously, and about three
years ago the women peace workers in the U.S.A. saw its possi-
bilities, and ^ began to work for it. About two years ago Mr.
Levinson visited Europe, and his scheme was thus brought more
prominently to the fore.
In April 1927, M. Briand, the Foreign Secretary for France,
speaking at a meeting in commemoration of the tenth .anni-
versaiT of the entrance of the U.S.A. into the War, made a
remark to the effect that he would at any time be willing to
sign a treaty with the U.S.A., outlawing war between the two
countries; and he followed this up in June 1927 with a formal
offer to Mr. Kellogg, the Secretary of State to the U.S.A.
Mr. Kellogg after some time replied \^th thfe suggestion that
instead of a bilateral treaty between France and the JCJ.S.A.
there should be a multilateral treaty in which all the civilized
nations of the world should be invited to join. This, it will be^
noticed, was in essence the same as Mr. Levinson's scheme. It
Is not necessary .to go into all the correspondence and negotia-
tions on the subject, or into the various exceptions or reserva-
tions proposed by the French and British Foreign Ministers,
89
90
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND .WAR
which would have weakened the treaty considerably, had they
been embodied in it» Secretary Kellogg was fiinn' in insisting
on the universality of the treaty, and on its freedom from all
reservations; and at last on August 27th 1928 it was signed by'
fifteen States, and within five or six months practically all the-
States of the world signified their intention of adhering to it
It consists of only two very brief and simple articles, by
the fir.st of which the signatories, in the names of their respec-
tive peoples, renounce war as an instrument of national policy;
while by the second they agree never to seek a settlement of
any dispute, of whatever nature and whatever origin, save by*
pacific means It thus stands as a clear and unqualified re-
nunciation of war, and whatever reservations were sought to be
made are outside it, hence have no binding quality, and are-
reduced to a mere statement of the interpretation put upon
the treaty by the individual statesmen who made them.
Now, while it is quite true that the logical outcome of this
renunciation is disarmament, that outcome is not likely to
follow very quickly. It would perhaps be more accurate to say
that this renunciation for the first time brings disarmament
within the realm of possibility. The governments have not
sufficient confidence in one another to dare to disarm so long
as war is recognized as a legitimate way of settling their dis-
putes, and no student of history can blame them. It is doubt-
ful hov/ far it is even now realized that this treaty has placed
war outside the pale of legitimacy; but as that realization
grows, the fear and distrust will gradually disappear.
The first thing needed, then, is for the people in every
country to realize what their Government has done in their
name, and to build up a strong enough public opinion to hold
the governments to their word. There is little, if any, room for
doubt in the minds of those who have followed the history of
the Pact that it is the force of public opinion that has brought
about its acceptance by practically the whole world. It^s for
the same force of public opinion to make it an effective reality.,
How does all this affect India? Do not her poverty and
her subjection make her powerless? I think not. Fdr public
opinion belongs to the realm of the mind, and nothing can
fetter the mind. To build up the strong united public opinion
that is needed will no doubt take time, especially in so vast
and diversified a country as this; but the building can be done
independently of all political parties and political disabilities;
the subject belongs to a higher sphere than these. So now is
the time to begin. Let the teachers in the schools and colleges
lead the way by seeing that the youths fully, understand what
this Pact really is, what it involves, and what power it places
.in the hands of the people. When this knowledge has been
THE KELLOGa PACT '
91
assimilated by the educated it will in some form permeate the
masses of the uneducated, preparing the way for the stand
India will take when she has attained her freedom.
It has been objected by some that there is no hope cf gov-
ernments being sincere, or keeping their word, and that the
treaty is therefore a n^ere futile gesture, a “fictitious Peace
Pact” {Young India, p. 117); the reply is that people can,
if they so will, prevent its being so, and make it instead one of
the greatest events that have ever happened in human history.
If they realize what an opportunity the signing of this Pact
gives them, they will assuredly not fail to take advantage of
it.— L. E.”
I gladly publish L. E.’s contribution, and have no difficulty
in agreeing that the Kellogg Pact has great possibilities, the
patent insincerity of many signatories notwithstanding. I share
to the full the apprehension about the Pact felt by the corres-
pondent whose letter to Young India L. E. has mentioned. But
this insincerity does not trouble me. My difficulty is as to the
suggestion made by L. E. about India’s part in promoting peace.
India’s contribution to peace must, in the nature of things, be
different in kind from that of the Western nations, India is not
an independent nation. And it may be inferred from her pre-
sent position that she has not the will to be independent. The-
parties to the Pact are mostly partners in the exploitation of
the peoples of Asia and Africa; India is the most exploited among
them all. The Peace Pact, therefore, in substance means a
desire to carry on the joint exploitation peacefully. At least
that is how the Pact appears to me to be at present. India has
never waged war against any nation. She has put up some-
times iU-organized or half-organized resistance in self-defence
pure and simple. She has, therefore, not got to develop the will
for peace. She has that in abundance, whether she knows it or
not. The way she can promote peace is to offer successful re-
sistance to her exploitation by peaceful means. That is to say,
'she has to achieve her independence, for this year to be known
as Dominion Status, by peaceful means. If she can do this, it
will be the largest contribution that any single nation will have
made towards world peace. If my diagnosis is correct, it will be
realized that the teaching such as L. E. wants in the schools can
only be ineffective and, what is worse, hypocritical. Even if
the teachers can make themselves believe in what they may be
called upon to teach, it will find no echo in the hearts of the*
^2 NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
i>oys and girls of their classes, even as a person who has never
Jiurt a fly will fail to understand the meaning of an appeal made
to him to will not to spill blood.
Young India, 4-7-1929
38
OUR CHOICE
An American correspondent has sent me a cutting from an
old number of Tlie^ World Tomorrow (August, 1928)- It is a
remarkable article on ‘Pacifism and National Security’ by Jolui
Nevin Sayre, which is worthy of perusal by every patriot. The
following opening paragraphs show which way the writer v/ould
lead us:
'Tacifism, first of all, asks people to consider v/hether
national armament can really conduce to security in a civiliza-
tion v/hich uses the tools of twentieth centurj' science. No
matter what may be said for defence by armament in the past,
we believe that it is an utterly obsolete and extremely dan-
gerous way of attempting to attain security now. In the world
in v/hich we live and in the decades immediately ahead it is
open to the double objection of (1) mounting cost, and (2) di-
minishing effectiveness for defence.
Within the span of forty years, that is within the lifetime
of many of my readers, the United States has increased the
annual expenditure for its navy from 15 million to 318 million
dollars. The last session of Congress passed appropriations
which mean that, every time the hands of the clock traverse
twenty-four hours, the United States spends 2,000,000 dollars
for upkeep of the army and navy. A leading article in The
Hew York Times, published in March 1927, was headed, ^Var
— Man’s Greatest Industry*. The writer asserted that ‘prepara-
tion to be ready for war constitutes what is actually the greatest
industry in the world.*
There is also an increasing human cost not measurable In
dollars. The machines of war have to be tended by men. The
munitions of war have to be manufactured by men, and ap-
proach is being made more and more toward the drafting of
industry and of whole populations for war service. Ohcc wars
were fought by professional armies which constituted but a
relatively small part of any people; today military strategists
I
OUR CHOICE
93 ^
plan to conscript the activity of the entire man power of a
nation. A proposed French law gives power to the State ta
conscript also the women. Compulsory military training in
time of peace and the invasion of schools and colleges by mili-
tary departments run by the Department of War are requisi-
tioning study tame of youth, and tending to regiment youth's
thinking. The post office, the newspapers, the radio, the movies,
artists, and men of science are in danger of being drawn in to
give their support to the building of war's preparedness ma-
chine. All this means an increasing cost to human liberty, to
freedom of thought and discussion, to the possibility of social
advance. It should be fully weighed in estimating the price to-
be paid for putting over an ‘adequate' security programme.
Armed preparedness is a huge cost in the present, and for the
future it is mounting.
Even worse is the fact that increase of expenditure fbr arma-
ment does not in the modem world purchase increase^ of secu-
rity. It may do so, possibly, for a score of years, but the policy
is subject to a law of diminishing returns, and leads straight
towards a climax of disaster. Senator Borah in discussing ‘what
is preparedness?' recently called attention to the huge public
debts and constantly increasing tax burdens which* governments
are putting on their peoples throughout the world. ‘The .things
y7ith which governments will have to contend in the future,’^
he said, ‘are the economic distress and political unrest of their*
own people’. A big armament programme, he warns us, ‘will be
'courting trouble.’ It will widen the breach between the citizen
and his Government. It will further discourage and exaspe-
rate those who already have more than they can bear. It will
not be preparedness, for that which accentuates economia
distress* is impreparedness.”
The fashion nowadays is to take for granted that whatever
America and England are doing is good enough for us. But
the figures given by the writer of the cost to America of her
armament are too terrible to contemplate. 'W'ar has become a
matter of money and resourcefulness in inventing weapons of
destruction. It is no longer a matter of personal bravery or en-
durance. To compass the destruction of men, women and
children, it might be enough for me to press a button and drop
poison on' them in a second.
Do we wish to copy this method of defending ourselves?
Even if we do, have we the financial ability? We complain of
ever-growing military expenditure. But if we would copy
America or • England, we * would have to increase the burden
tenfold.
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
‘Why not, if the thing is worth doing?’ asks the critic. The
question then is, ‘Is it worth doing?’ Mr. Sayre answers em-
phatically and says, Tt is not worth doing for any nation/ I
say nothing about our so-called naval or military programme
when it is resisted by the Government. The nation cannot be
kept on the non-\dolent path by wolence. It must grow from
within to the state it may aspire to. The question, therefore, for
us to consider is, ‘WTiat is our immediate aspiration?’ Do we
first want to copy the Western nations and then in the dim and
distant future, after having gone through the agony, retrace
our steps? Or do we want to strike out an original path, or
rather retain what to me is our own predominantly peaceful
path and therethrough win and assert our freedom?
Here there is no question of compromise with cowardice.
Hither we train and arm ourselves for destruction, be it in self-
defence, and in the process train for suffering too; or we merely
prepare ourselves for suffering for defending the coimtry or
delivering it from domination. In either case bravery is indis-
pensable. In the first case personal bravery is not of such im-
portance as in the second. In the second case too we shall
perhaps never be able to do without violence altogether. But
violence then will be subser\dent to non-\doIence and will
always be a diminishing factor in national life.
At the present moment, though the national creed is -one of
non-\dolence, in thought and word at least, we seem to be drift-
ing towards violence. Impatience pervades the atmosphere.
We are restrained from violence through our weakness. What is
wanted is a deliberate giving up of \dolence out of strength. To
he able to do this requires imagination coupled v/ith a pene-
trating study of the world drift. Today the superficial glamour
of the West dazzles us, and we mistake for progress the giddy
dance which engages us from day to day. We refuse to see that
it is surely leading us to death. Above all we must recognize
that to compete with the Western nations on their terms is to
court suicide. Whereas if we realize that notwithstanding the
seeming supremacy of violence it is the moral force that governs
the universe, we should train for non-\nolence with the fullest
faith in its limitless possibilities. Everybody recognizes that,
if a non-violent atmosphere had been maintained in 1922, we
could have completely gained our end. Even as it is, we had
MILITARY PROGRAMME
95
^ striking demonstration of the ef&cacy of non-violence, crude
though it was, and the substance of Swaraj then gained has
never been lost. The paralysing fear that had possessed the
nation before the advent of Satyagraha has gone once for aU.
In my opinion, therefore, non-violence is a matter of patient
training. If we are to be saved and are to make a substantial
^contribution to the world’s progress, ours must emphatically
'and predominantly be the way of peace.
George Joseph has been one of my dearest comrades. When
1 was having rest in Yeravda, he was editor of Young India*
Before that at my instance he was editor of the now defunct
Independent. He had sacrificed a lucrative practice for the sake
of the country. He went to gaol for the same cause. He is an
■earnest and honest worker. He is therefore entitled to a res-
pectfm hearing, the more so'when such a man differs from you,
and rejecting the old recommends with the fervour of a convert
the adoption of a new policy. George Joseph has done it. One
■of his old associates sends a cutting from a newspaper con-
taining Joseph’s enunciation of his new policy, and marks it
^‘George Joseph’s confession of faith.” Another man, an un-
known admirer of George Joseph, copies out from the report
the whole of his criticism of the khadi programme. He writes
in a most distracted mood, and insists that I must take notice
of the remarks about khadi.
There is no cause for distraction, grief or alarrn. It would
be surprising, if, in a great national upheaval, we did not find
men honestly recanting old views and enunciating new. Change
is a condition of progress. An honest man cannot afford to
'Observe mechanical consistency when the mind revolts against
anything as an error. We must therefore patiently try to
understand what George Joseph has to^say, and not hesitate to
accept what appeals to our reason, even though it may mean a
sacrifice of some cherished ideal.
96
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
It is, I hope, in that spirit that I have endeavoured to study*
Joseph’s speech. He condemns khadi, he is ''quite satisfied that
the removal of untouchability is not primarily a problem of
^atesmanship.” His programme in one simple sentence is:
'Militarize India.’ Here is an extract from the speech:
“We cannot all become soldiers. There is not enough room
for us. But it should be possible for us to set about the idea of
training about 5,000 men every year in this presidency in urban
units. The men will go to drill two or three times a week, go
out to camp three weeks in the year. Such training should be
made available not only for the students who are at college but
also for men of sufficient social and educational status, the
educational standard being the membership of the School
Leaving class. If you see in every street such people going about
in khaki, there will be a new element in our life.' This kind
of training would make people to stand straight, to think
straight, and to speak straight. It will be a great enrichment
of our life.''
My experience teaches me differently. I have known men
in khaki rolling in gutters instead of standing straight. I have
seen a Dyer thinking crooked and speaking not straight but
nonsense. I have known a commander-in-chief being unable to
think at all, let alone thinking straight. Let those who are en-
amoured of military training have it by all means; but to sug*-
gest it 'as a new constructive programme’ betrays impatience
and hasty thinking. There is not much danger of 'the new pro-
gramme’ taking root in the Indian soil. Moreover, it is against
the new order of things that is coming into being even in the
West which has grown weary of the war-god. The military
spirit in the West bids fair to Mil the very humanity in man and
reduce him to the level of the beast. What is wanted and what
India has, thank God, Iparnt in a measure undreamt of before
is the spirit of unarmed resistance before which the bayonet
mins to rust and gunpowder turns to dust. The vision that
Joseph puts before us of an armed government bending a mino-
rity to its will by a clatter of arms is a negation of the demo-
cratic spirit and progress. If that is the promise of the new pro-
gramme, we have the armed coercion even now, not indeed of a
mere minority but of an overwhelming majority. What we want,
I hope, is a government not based on coercion even of a minority,
but on its conversion. If it is a change from white military rule
to a brown one, we hardly need make any fuss. At any rate*
MILITARY PROGRAMME
97
the masses then do not count. They will be subject to the same
spoliation as now if not even worse. When .George Joseph has
lived down his impatience, I know him to be too honest not to
retrace his steps and become the fine democrat that, to my great
joy, I had discovered him to be on the Madras beach in 1919.
Let us then turn to what he has to say about khadi :
“As long as I was within the fold of the Congress, the, only
thing the constructive programme represented was khaddar.
removal of imtouchability, and in later years prohibition. Now
I must frankly tell you that I have come deliberately to the
conclusion that not one of these goes to the root of the funda-
mental need of this nation. Khaddar does not. I think it v/ill
not survive the creator of the movement, Gandhiji. I have
come to that conclusion because of the fundamental economic
defect which is attached to khaddar. It costs far too much
to produce and to buy, and is, consequently, unjust to the con-
sumer. Khaddar which costs about a rupee a yard will not
stand agaiilst the cloth produced by the machine industries
costing as. 6. My experience of khaddar is that it results in
injustice to the producer also. The women, the spinners, who
are at the root of khaddar, working for 10 hours a day, have
got to be content with a wage of as. 3. I suggest that an indus-
try based on the payment of as. 3 as wages to the fundamental
producer thereof cannot succeed, because it amounts to sweat-
ing of labour. The sweating of labour consists essentially in
paying to the labourer less than is sufacient for her physical*
maintenance. It is no answer to say that the country is strick-
en with famine, that there are millions of people without occu-
pation, and to say that for these as. 3 is better than no income
whatever. I refuse to accept that argument. That cannot be an~
argument which can appeal to any human employer of labour,
» or any statesman with a forward-looking view, in reference to
the affairs of his country. It is no consolation to be told that
I shall be right in offering as. 3 wages a day, when I know as
a matter of economic necessity that the wages would not be
sufficient to maintain the worker, much less her family. That
is to my mind the hopeless, ineradicable and inexorable vice
that attaches to khaddar. That is why today, in spite -of 7
or 8 years of labour by Gandhiji, and in spite of lakhs of
money poured like water into the organization of the industry,
the production of khaddar is infinitely small compared to the
magnitude of the problem that has got to be solved, that is to
produce clothing for the whole of India, and to put an end to-
the importation of Rs. 60 crores worth of cloth every year.”
Here George Joseph’s impatience for reform has betrayed
him into lapse of memory. For he brings no new argument in
98
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR «
support of his summary rejection of khadi, but quotes as facts
what himself used to refute as fallacies. Arguments may be
revised on further consideration, but facts may not be unless
they are proved to have been false. Khadi as conceived for the
use of millions does not cost more than foreign cloth for the
simple reason that the millions must, if khadi is to be used by
them, be their own manufacturers and consumers. These pages
have shown that in Bardoli, Bijolia and several other places
khadi is being so manufactured and consumed, even as in mil'-
lions of homes people cook and eat their own food. It is possible
to demonstrate, in terms of metal, that rice or bread cooked in
a few factories would cost less than they cost today in the
millions of homes. But nobody on that accoimt would dare sug-
gest that the millions should cease to cook and should send their
raw rice and wheat to be cooked in centralized factories.
Again it is not true to say that women spinners work ten
hoius per day. Whatever spinning they do is done during their
zpare hours, and what they get is not a day’s wage but in the
majority of cases a substantial addition to their daily earnings
from their daily avocation. The earning from spinning is waste
turned into wealth and not the price of ^sweated labour’ as
Joseph puts it. And let me correct Joseph by sa^dng that no
spinner even working for 10 hours per day can earn 3 as. per
day. Spinning has never been conceived as a full-day occupa-
tion. Lastly, it is untrue to say that “lakhs of money have been
poured like water into the organization of the industry.” No
organization on a nationwide scale has been known to cost Jess
in organizing than this has. What is true is that a paltry 25
lakhs have been invested as capital for organizing this great and
daily growing cottage industry which brings water to thousands
of parched lips. Joseph must think cheap of his countrymen
when he prophesies that an organization which employs at least
1,500 willing workers in 1,500 villages, an organization which
brings daily relief to nearly 150,000 women, an organization
which commands the self-sacrificing labours of a Mithubai Petit,
the Naoroji Sisters, of a Banker, a Jamnalal, a Rajagopalachari,
and Abbas Tyebji, a Venkatappayya, a Pattabhi, a Gangadharrao,
a Vallabhbhai, a Lakshmidas, a Rajendraprasad, a Jairamdas,
a Mahadev, a Kripalani, a Satish Chandra Dasgupta, a Suresh
Banerji, aye a Jawaharlal, and a host of others, lawyers, doctors,
DIPFICULTy OP PRACTICE
99
merchants and laymen too numerous to mention though known
to fame, will die after the death of one man. It will be a tragic
miracle, if all these men and women find the morning after my
death that khadi was a ‘huge blunder’.
And the pity of it all is that Joseph does not- suggest an
alternative. Not even if every educated Indian was dressed in
khaki and knew how to shoot straight, would the problem of
the growing poverty and the forced partial unemployment of
millions of the peasantry be solved without a special programme
devised for the purpose. For better or worse khadi is that pro-
gramme till a better is evolved.
Young India, 19-12-1929
40
DIFFICULTY OF PRACTICE
The reader should read Rev. B. de Ligt’s letter printed else-
where (Appendix). I welcome the letter as of a fellow-seeker
in the field of ahimsa. It is entitled to respectful consideration;
And such friendly discussion leads to a clearer conception of
the possibilities and limitations of non-violence.
In spite of the greatest effort to be detached, no man can
;altogether undo the ejffect of his environment or of his upbring-
ing. Non-violence of two persons occupying different positions
will not outwardly take the same shape. Thus the non-violence
of a child towards his father would take the shape of conscious
and voluntary submission to his violence when he loses his
femper. But if the child has lost his temper, the father’s sub-
mis^ on to the child’s violence would be meaningless. The* father
would take the child to his bosom and instantaneously sterilize
the child’s violence. In each case it is of course assumed that
the outward act is an e5q)ression of the inward intention. One
who having retaliation in his breast submits to violence out of
policy is not truly non-yiolent, and may even be a hypocrite if
he hides his intention. It should also be remembered that non-
violence comes' into play only when it comes in cdntact with
violence. One who refrains from violence when there is no
100
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR *
occasion for its exercise is simply un-violent and has no credit
for his inaction.
Dominion Status ceasing to be a factor, the points raised
from that imaginary event now need not be discussed except
to say that the enjoyment by India of Dominion Status would
have meant India, then become an equal partner, instead of
being ruled by it, dominating the foreign policy of Great Britain.
My general and hearty approval of the Nehru Report must
not be taken to mean endorsement of every word of it. My
approval need not carry endorsement of the constructive pro-
gramme for the future governance of free India. My non-
violence would not prevent me from fighting my countrymen
on the many questions that must arise when India' has become
free. A mere academic discussion can only hamper the present
progress of non-violence. I know, however, that, if I survive
the struggle for freedom, I might have to give non-violent battle
to my own countrymen, which may be as stubborn as that in
which I am now engaged,^ But the military schemes now being
considered by the great Indian leaders are highty likely to
appear even to them to be wholly unnecessary, assuming that
we have come to our own demonstrably through non-violent
means deliberately chosen and used-
My collaboration with my countrymen today is confined to
the breaking of our shackles. How we would feel and what we
shall do after breaking them is more than they or I know.
It is profitless to speculate whether Tolstoy in my place
would have acted differently from me. It is enough for me to
give the assurance to my friends in Europe that in no single act
of mine have I been consciously guilty of endorsing violence or
compromising my creed. Even the seeming endorsement of
violent action by my participation on the side of Britain in the
Boer War and the Zulu Revolt was a recognition, in the interest
of non-violence, of an inevitable situation. That the participa-
tion may nevertheless have been due to my weakness or igno-
rance of the working of the universal law of non-violence is
quite possible. Only I had no conviction then, nor have any
now, of such weakness or ignorance.
A non-violent man will instinctively prefer direct partici-
pation to indirect, in a sj^stem which is based on \dolence and to
SUPERSTITIONS DHT HARD
101
which he has to belong without any choice being left to him.
I belong to a world which is partly based on violence. If I have
only a choice between paying for the army of soldiers to kill
my neighbours or to be a soldier myself, I would, as I must,
consistently with my creed, enlist as a soldier in the hope of
controlling the forces of violence and even of converting my
comrades.
\
National independence is not fiction. It is as necessary as
individual independence. But neither, if it is based on non-
violence, may ever be a menace to the equal independence of
the nation or the individual as the case may be. As with indivi-
dual and national independence, so with the international. The
legal maxim is equally moral: Sic ufere tuo ut alienuvi non
laedas. It has been well said the universe is compressed in the
atom. There is not one law for the atom and another for the
imiverse.
Young India, 30-1-1930
41
SUPERSTITIONS DIE HARD
Mr. Henry Eaton writes from California:
‘T am not a British sympathizer. My ancestors fought to
liberate themselves from, the British in 1776. But as far as I
can see from what I read in the papers it would be more harm-
ful than beneficial if Britain got out of India. I do not mean to
infer that India could not govern herself, although I cannot
but see that such an attempt would be very arduous at the
present time. But if Britain gets out of India, who is going to
keep the Russians or any other nation out? Certainly India,
from all I can learn of her, has no adequate army to protect
herself.
But perhaps you would prefer Russian masters to English.
Russia is waiting there at the Khyber pass. Russia understands
the East. Her people are a mingling of the occidental and the
oriental. But Russia has Western culture. Any relation India
could have with her would have to be subordinate. Personally
I am not antagonistic to Russia. Her war against Capitalism
is the great hope of Western civilization. Here in Ameriqa,
our greatest capitalist, Henry Ford, realizes the inevitability of
an equitable distribution of wealth. But Russia as master of
102
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
Indiia does not particularly ' appeal to me. With Russia as
master India would lose her identity as a culture. With Eng-
land India has always retained that identity.
Perhaps you do not fear the Russian menace as much as
we of the Western world. In America many of us are sure that
once Britain is out of India, Russia will step in. We cannot
visualize the India of the present, the India with her caste
system and her primitive methods of manufacture and agri-
culture, defending herself against Western invasion. You have
no national organization for protection. There is no unity in
India. Unity has been essential to the rise of Western culture
and civilization. There also seems to be no progress, as we look
on progress in the West, in India. You yourself advocate the
return to the old methods of weaving. Have you, with your
great intelligence, no realization of the inevitability of change,
of moving forward ?
You cannot go back from old age to childhood. How then
can you go back from enlightened methods of weaving to un-
enlightened methods and hope to gain anything? Wliile you
work in the old way that is hard, you realize that there is a
new way that is easy, and you cannot be satisfied with the old
hard way. You see how Japan has risen to power by adopting
the new way and even China is awakening. India alone seems
not to realize the importance of the new ways of the world.
How is it that you, her great leader, do not preach progress to
your people?
These are two questions that puzzle me greatly: Why does
India not realize the Russian menace if she becomes free of
England? And why does Mahatma Gandhi not make his people
realize that their freedom lies first of all in adopting the new
system of labour with the help of machinery? I would very
much like to have you, who alone must know the answers, tell
them to me.
By birth and heritage I am a citizen of the United States
of America, but I take such a personal interest in the affairs
of the world that I like to think of myself in my little way as
a citizen of the world. At the University I attend here in Cali-
fornia, the question of India often arises. The general sym-
pathies are with you against the British. However, as I myself
can understand the present situation iii India, it seems that
of the two evils British control in India is the lesser. The other
evil, as I have already tried to explain, is Russian domination.
But what we all want to know is how you feel about the matter.”
This letter betrays two superstitions. One of them is that
India is unfit to govern herself because she cannot defend her-
self and is torn with internal dissensions. The writer gratui-
SUPERSTITIONS DIE HARD
103
tously assumes that, if Britain withdraws, Russia is ready to
pounce upon India. This is an insult to Russia. Is Russia’s one
business to rule over those peoples who are not ruled by Bri-
tain? And if Russia has such nefarious designs upon India, does
not the writer see that the same power that will oust the British
from domination is boimd to prevent any other domination?
If the control is handed to India’s representatives by agreement,
there must be some condition whereby Britain will guarantee
protection from foreign aggression as a penance for her con-
scious or unconscious neglect during all these past years to fit
India for defending herself.
Personally, even under agreement, I should rely more upon
the capacity of the nation to offer civil resistance to any aggres-
sor as it did last year with partial success in the case of the
British occupier. Complete success awaits complete assimila-
tion of non-violence in thought, word and deed by the nation.
An ocular demonstration of the success of nation-wide Satya-
graha must be a prelude to its world-wide acceptance and hence
as a natural corollary to the admission of the futility of arma-
ment. The only antidote to armament, which is the visible
symbol of violence is Satyagraha, the visible symbol of non-
violence. But the writer is oppressed also by the fear of our
dissensions. In the first place, they are grossly exaggerated in
transmission to the West. In the second place, they are hardened,
during foreign control. Imperial rule means divide et impera.
They must, therefore, melt with the withdrawal of the frigid
foreign rule and the introduction of the warmth-giving sunshine
of real freedom . . •
Lastly, I do not subscribe to the belief that everything old
is bad. Truth is old and difficult. Untruth has many attrac-
tions. But I would gladly go back to the very old Golden Age
of Truth. Good old brown bread is any day superior to the pasty
white bread which has lost much of its nutritive value in going
through the various processes of refinement. The list of old
and yet good things can be endlessly multiplied. The spinning
wheel is one such thing, at any rate for India.
When India becomes self-supporting, self-reliant, and proof '
against ternptations and exploitation, she will cease to be the
object of greedy attraction for any power in the West or the
104
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
East, and will then feel secure without ha\’ing to carry the
Durden of expensive armament. Her internal economj^ will be
India’s strongest bulwark against aggression.
Young India, 2-7-1931
42
WHEN THE BRITISH WITHDRAW
Q. Do you want British control to be wthdrawn at once ?
A. Certainly. I have never contemplated a gradual
process. But that does not mean complete isolation from
Great Britain. If Great Britain will have complete partner-
ship, I would treasure it ; but it must be a real partnership, no
cloak for rulership or guardianship. I know that some of
honestly entertain the fear that there would be anarchy and
bloodshed no sooner than the British withdrew from India.
Well, if the British so choose, it is up to them to help us out of
the mes^ that they have helped to create. They are responsible
for much of the dissensions between diSerent communities, and
they are responsible for having emasculated a whole people.
And I may confess that we may experience temporarj’^ difncult}^
if you go away at once. But it is open to you to render some
assistance, pro\dded that you would consent to remain under
our control. But what can conquer your impardonable pride
of race ? I would willingly have British soldiers and British
officers under our national Government ; we would be guided
by their advice too ; but the final direction of policy must be
ours. But even if 3 ’'ou withdrew and we v/ere ^vithout any dis-
ciplined assistance, we have enough faith in our non-\dolence.
I do not think that we will not sur\dve the withdrav/al of Bri-
tish power and British assistance both of which are toda 3 ^ super-
imposed on us. With these superimposed I should not feel the
glow of freedom. And I wish that v/e may have an opportunit 3 ''
to fight imto death for freedom, if onl 3 ’’ to open your eyos. V.Ti}*
is it that you do not ask questions of fitness in respect of the
Afghans ? We have a culture not inferior to theirs. Or do
you think it is difficult to vdn freedom and enj 03 ’’ it without an
element of savagery in one’s nature? Well, if we are a
THEORY Airo PRACTICE OF NON-VIOLENCE
105
nation of cowards, the sooner you leave us to our fate the better.
It is better that the'^ burden of cowards was removed from this
C-
^arth. But cowards cannot for ever remain cowards. You do
not know what a coward I was when young, and you will agree
that I am not quite a coward today. Multiply my example and
you will have one whole nation shaking off its cowardice.
Young India, 15-10-1931
43
THEORY AND PRACTICE OF NON-VIOLENCE
The bulk of the questions asked at these meetings centred
naturally round non-violence, and I (M.D.) summarize them
here, including therein some of the questions and answers at
the Paris meeting.
By way of introduction I shall give his (Gandhiji’s) distinc-
tion between the methods of violence and non-violence : “ In
the method we are adopting in India, fraud, l 3 dng, deceit, and
all the ugly brood of violence and untruth have absolutely no
room. Everything is done openly and above board, for Truth
hates secrecy. The more open you are the more truthful you
are likely to be. There is no stich thing as defeat or despair
in the dictionary of a man who bases his life on Truth and Non-
violence. And yet the method of non-violence is not in any
shape or form a passive or inactive method. It is essentially^
an active movement, much more active than the one involving
the use of sanguinary weapons. Truth and Non-violence are
perhaps the activest forces you have in the world. A man who
wields sanguinary weapons and is intent upon destroying those
whom he considers his enemies, does at least require some rest,
*and has to lay down his arms for a while in every twentyfour
hours. He is, therefore, essentially inactive, for a certain part
of the day. Not so the votary of Truth and Non-Violence, for
the simple reason that they are not external weapons. They
reside in the human breast, and they are actively working their
way whether you are awake or whether you are asleep, whether
you are walking leisurely' or playing an active game. The
106
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
panopKed warrior of Truth and Non-violence is ever and in-
cessantly active.”
How then can one be effectively non-violent ? By simply
refusing to take up arms ? Einstein had made the call to the
people not to take part in war. Was that enough ? — Questions
which were raised again and again at various meetings and
answered in a language inspired by the audience and the-
occasion.
About Einstein’s call he said with a humour which nO'one
could have mistaken ; “ My answer can be only one that, if
Europe can take up the method enthusiastically, nothing could
be better. Indeed, if I may say so about a great man, I would
say that Einstein has stolen the method from me. But, if you
want me to elaborate the thing, I would say that merely to re-
fuse military service is not enough. To refuse to render mili-
tary service when the particular time arrives is to do the thing
after all the time for combating the evil is practically gone.
Military service is only a symptom of the disease which is
deeper. I suggest to you that those who are not on the register
of military service are equally participating in the crime if
they support the State otherwise. He or she who supports a
State organized' in the military way — whether directly or in-
directly — participates in the sin. Each man old or young takes
part in the sin by contributing to the maintenance of the State
by paying the taxes. That is why I said to myself during the
war that, so long as I ate wheat supported by the army "whilst
was doing everything short of being a soldier, it was best for
me to enlist in the army and be shot ; otherwise I should retire
to mountains and eat food grown by nature. Therefore all
those who want to stop military service can do so by withdraw-
ing all co-operation. Refusal of military service is much more
superficial than non-co-operation with the whole system which
supports the State. But then one’s opposition becomes so swift
and so effective that you run the risk of not only being marched
to jail, but of being thrown into the streets.”
Then may not one accept the non-military services of the
State ? The statement of the position had moved Pierre Cere-
sole deeply, and he asked this question in a way which was
most touching. “We represent our truth, you represent the
THEORY AND PRACTICE OF NON-VIOLENCE
107 *
truth. The argument is often being advanced here, and we
should like to be enlightened by you.”
“Now” said Gandhiji, “you have touched the tenderest
spot in human natmre. I was faced with the very question as
author of the non-co-operation movement. I said to myself,
there is no State either run by Nero or Mussolini which has not
good points about it ; but we have to reject the whole, once we
decide to non-co-operate with the system. ‘There are in our
country grand public roads and palatial educational institutions/
'said I to myself, ‘but they are part of a system which crushes
the nation. I should not have anything to do with them. They
are like the fabled snake with a brilliant jewel on its head, but
which has fangs full of poison.’ So I came to the conclusion
that the British rule in India had crushed the spirit of the nation
and stunted its growth, and so I decided to deny myself all the
privileges — services, courts, titles. The policy would vary with
different coimtries, but sacrifice and seLf-denial are the essential
points. What Einstein has said would occur only once a year
and only with very few people. But I suggest it as your first
duty to non-co-operate with the State.”
But is there not a deep difference between an independent
nation and a subject nation ? India may have a fundament^
quarrel with an alien government, but how can the Swiss quarrel
with the State ?
“Difference there undoubtedly is,” said Gandhiji. “As a
member of a subject nation I could best help by shaking rid of
my subjection. But here I am asked as to how best to get out
of a military mentality. You are enjoying the amenities on con-
dition that you render military service to the^State. There you
have to get State rid of the military mentality.”
But Pierre Ceresole still had his doubts. The argument had
irresistible appeal for him ; but how did his own particular
mission fit in, if he was to pursue the method to its extreme
logical conclusions? A question was asked at the great meet-
ing in Geneva about Gandhiji’s opinion regarding the work of
the International Red Cross Society organized in Switzerland
aijd the thousands of lives of prisoners that it had saved, and
Gandhiji’s answer to the question contained for Pierre Ceresole
108
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
the solution of all his difficulties and a message of cheer for the
International Service that he had organized. “ I am ashamed to
have to own that I do not know the history of this wonderful and
magnificent organization. If it has saved prisoners by the thou-
sands, my head bows before it. But having paid .this tribute,
may I say that this organization should cease to think of giving
relief after the war but think of giving relief without the war ?
If war had no redeeming feature, no courage and heroism behind
it, it would be a despicable thing, and would not need speeches
to destroy it. But what I would suggest to you is infinitely nobler
than war in all its branches including Red Cross organization.
Believe me there are many more million prisoners — slaves of
their passions and conditions of life, and believe me that there
are millions woimded by their own folly, and millions of wreck-
ed homes on the face of the earth. The peace societies of to-r
morrow would, therefore, have enough work cut out for them
when they take up international service, and may S^vitzerland
^ve the lead to the world in this great task.’*
In answer to a similar question at another meeting he said :
Non-co-operation in military service and service in non-military
matters are not compatible. ‘Definitely’ military service is an
ill-chosen word. You are all the while giving military service
by deputy because you are supporting a State which is based on
military service. In Transvaal and other countries some are de-
barred from military service, but they have to pay money to the
State. You will have to extend the scope of non-co-operation to
your taxes. There is no limit to extending our service to our
neighbours across our State-made frontiers. God never made
ihose frontiers.”
Q. Since disarmament chiefly depends on great powers, why
should Switzerland, which is a small State and a neutral State,
be asked to disarm itself ?
A. It is from the neutral groimd of your country that I am
speaking to all other pow’^ers and not only to Switzerland. If you
won’t carry this message to other parts of Europe, I shall be ab-
solved from all blame. And seeing that Switzerland is a neutral
territory and a non-aggressive nation, there is all the more rea-
son why Switzerland should not need an army. Secondly, it is
-through your hospitality and by reason of your occupying the
THEORY AND PRACTICE OP NON-VIOLENCE
10 &
vantage ground that you have all nationals coming to you. It
should be possible for you to give to the world a lesson in dis-
armament and show that you are brave enough to do without
an army.
\
Q, How co^d a disarmed neutral country allow other
nations to be destroyed ? But for our army which was waiting
ready at our frontier during the last war we should have been
ruined.
A. At the risk of being considered a visionary or a fool I
must answer this question in the only manner I know. It would
be cowardly of a neutral country to allow an army to devastate
a neighbouring country. But there are two ways in com-
mon between soldiers of war and soldiers of non-violence,
and if I had been a citizen of Switzerland and a Presiderit of the
Federal State, what I would have done would be to refuse pass-
age to the invading army by refusing all supplies. Secondly, by
re-enacting a Thermopylae in Switzerland, you would have pre-
sented a living wall of men and women and children, and invit-
ing the invaders to walk over your corpses. You may say that
such a thing is beyond human experience and endurance. I say
that it is not so. It was quite possible. Last year in Gujarat
women stood lathi charges unflinchingly, and in Peshawar
thousands stood hails of bullets without resorting to violence.
Imagine these men and women staying in front of an army re-
quiring a safe passage to another country. The army would be
brutal enough to walk over them, you might say. I would then
say, you will stiU have done your duty by allowing yourself to
be annihilated. An army that dares to pass over the corpses of
innocent men and women would not be able to repeat that ex-
periment. You may, if you wish, refuse to believe in such cour-
age on the part of the masses of men and women, but then you
would have to ad^nit that non-violence is made \ of sterner stuff.
It was ’ never conceived as a weapon of the weak, but of the
stoutest hearts.
Q. Is it open to a soldier to fire in the air and avoid \dolence ?
A. A soldier, who having enlisted himself flattered himself
that he was avoiding violence by shooting in the air, did no
credit to his courage or to his creed of non-violence. In my
scheme of things such a man would be held to be guilty of un-
TIO NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAB
truth and cowardice both — cowardice in that in order to escape
punishment he enlisted, and untruth in^that he enlisted to serve
.as- soldier and did not fire as expected. Such a thing discredits
the cause of waging war against war. The v/ar-resisters have
to be like Caesar’s wife — above suspicion. Their strength lies in
.absolute adherence to the morality of the question.
M. D.
Young India, 31-12-1931
44
THE GREATEST FORCE
Non-violence is at the root of every one of my activities and
therefore also of the three public activities on which I am just
now visibly concentrating all my energy. These are untouch-
ability, khadi, and village regeneration in general. Hindu Mus-
lim unity is my fourth love. But so far as any visible manifes-
tation is concerned, I have owned defeat on that score. Let the
public, however, not assume therefrom that I am inactive. If
not during my lifetime, I'know that after my death both Hindus
and Mussalman^will bear mtness that I had never ceased to
yearn pfter communal peace.
Non-violence to be a creed has to be all-pervasive. I cannot
be non-violent about one activity of mine and violent about
others. That would be a policy, not a life-force. That being so,
I cannot be indifferent about the war that Italy is now waging
against Abyssinia. But I have resisted most pressing invitations
to express my opinion and give a lead to the country. Self-sup-
pression is often necessary in the interest of Truth and Non-vio-
lence. If India had as a nation imbibed the creed of non-vio-
lence, corporate or national, I should have had no hesitation in
giving a lead. But, in spite of a certain hold I have on the mil-
lions of this country, I know the very grave and glaring limita-
tions of that hold. India has an unbroken tradition of non-vio-
lence from times immemorial. But at no time in her ancient
history, as far as I know it, has it had complete non-violence in
action pervading the whole land. Nevertheless, it is my un-
the greatest force
111
shakable beHef that her destiny is to dehver the message of non-
Adolence to mankind. It may take ages to come to fruition. But
■^0 far as I can judge, no other country will precede her m the
fulfilment of that mission.
Be that as it may, it is seasonable to contemplate the impli-
cations oJ that matchless force. Three concrete questions were,
the other day, incidentally asked by friends :
1. What could ill-armed Abyssinia do against weU-armed
Italy, if she were non-violent ?
2. What could England, the greatest and the most J
member of the League, do against determined Italy, if she (Eng-
land) were non-violent in your sense of the term .
3. What could India do, if she suddenly became non-violent
in your sense of the term ?
Before I answer the questions let me lay down five simple
axioms of non-violence as I know it.
(a) Non-violence impUes as complete self-puriflcation as is
humanly possible,
(b) Man for man the strength of f °
prcTortion to the ability, not the will, of the non-yi P
to inflict violence.
(c) Non-violence is without exception superior
i.e. the power at the disposal of a non-violent person is alway
greater than he would have if he was violent.
(d) There is no such thing as defeat in non-violence. The
-end of violence is surest defeat. ^
(e) The ultimate end of non-violence is surest
'such a term may be used of non-violence. In reality,
there is no sense of defeat, there is no sense o vie o , ,
- The foregoing questions may be answered in the ig
these axioms.
1. If Abyssinia were non-violent, she would
would want none. She would make no ^ ^ never
or any other power for armed intervention. She jo
give any cause for complaint. And Italy would find nothi
conquer if Abyssinians would not offer occupa-
would they give co-operation wfiling or forced. Itahan occup
112
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
tion in that case would mean that of the land without its people.
That, however, is not Italy’s exact object. She seeks submission
of the people of that beautiful land.
2. If Enghshmen were as a nation to become non-violent at
heart, they would shed imperiahsm, they would give .up the use-
of arms. The moral force generated by such an act of renuncia-
tion would stagger Italy into willing surrender of her designs.
England would then be a living embodiment of the axioms I
have laid down. The effect of such conversion would mean the
greatest miracle of all ages. And yet if non-violence is not an
idle dream, some such thing has some day to come to pass some-
where. I live in that faith. •
3. The last question may be answered thus. As I have said,
India as a nation is not non-violent in the full sense of the term.
Neither has she any capacity for offering violence — not because
she has no arms. Physical possession of arms is the least neces-
sity of the brave. Her non-violence is that of the weak ; she
betrays her weakness in many of her daily acts. She appears
before the world today as a deca 3 dng nation. I mean here not in
the mere political sense but essentially in the non-violent, moral
sense. She lacks the ability to offer physical resistance. She has
no consciousness of strength. She is conscious only of her
weakness. If she were otherwise, there would be no commimal
problems, nor political. If she were non-violent in the cons-
ciousness of her strength, Englishmen would lose their role of
distrustful conquerors. We may talk politically as we hke and
often legitimately blame the English rulers, feut if we, as
Indians, could but for a moment visualize omselves as a strong'
people disdaining to strike, we should cease to fear Englishmen
whether as soldiers, traders 'or administrators, and they to dis-
trust us. Therefore, if we became truly non-violent, we should
carry Englishmen -with us in all we might do. In other words,
we being millions would be the greatest moral force in the world,
and Italy would listen to our friendly word.
The reader has, I hope, by now perceived that my' argument
is but a feeble and clmnsy attempt to prove my axioms which
to be such must be self-proved.
Till my eyes of geometrical understanding had been opened,
my brain was swimming as I read and re-read the twelve axioms
A TALK ON NON-VIOLENCE
/
118
of Euclid. After the opening of my eyes geometry seemed to be
the easiest science to learn. Much more so is the case with non-
violence. It is a matter of faith and experience, not of argument,
beyond a point. So long as the world refuses to believe, she must
await a miracle, i.e. an ocular demonstration of non-violence on
a mass scale. They say this is against human nature — non-vio-
lence is only for the individual. If so, where is the difference in
kind between man and beast ? ^
Harijan, 12-10-1935
/
45
A TALK ON NON-VIOLENCE
Now the talk centered on a discussion which was the main"
thing that had drawn the distinguished members to Gandhiji.
“Is non-violence from your point of view a form of direct
action ? inquired Dr. Thurman, “ It is not one form, it is the'
only form,” said Gandhiji. “ I do not of course confine the words
‘direct action’ to their technical meaning. But without a direct
active expression of it, non-violence to my mind is meaningless.
It is the greatest and the activest force in the world. One cannot
be passively non-violent. In fact ‘non-violence’ is a term I had
to coin in order to bring out the root meaning of aliimsa. In
spite of the negative particle ‘non,’ it is no* negative force.
Superficially we are surrounded in life by strife and bloodshed,
life living upon life. But some great seer, who ages ago pene-
trated the centre of truth, said : It is not through strife and vio-
lence but through non-violence that man can fulfil his destiny
and his duty to his fellow creatirres. It is a force which is more
positive than electricity, and more powerful than even ether. At
the centre of non-violence is a force which is self-acting. Aliimsa
means ‘ love ’ in the Pauline sense, and yet something more than
the ‘love’ defined by St. Paul, although I know St. Paul’s beauti-
ful definition is good enough for all practical purposes. Ahimsa
includes the whole creation, and not only human. Besides^‘ love ^
in the English language has other connotations, and so I was
compelled to use the negative word. But it does not, as I have
told you, express a negative force, but a -force superior to
8
114
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE Am WAR
all the forces put together. One person who can express -ahimsc
in life exercises a force superior to all the forces of brutality.
Q. And is it possible for any individual to achieve this ?
Gandhiji : Certainly. If there was any exclusiveness
about it, I should reject it at once. . '
Q. Is any idea of possession foreign to it ?
Gandhiji : Yes. It possesses nothing, therefore it possesses
'everything.
Q. Is it possible for a single human being to resist the per-
sistent invasion of the quality successfully ?
' Gandhiji : It is possible. Perhaps your question is more
universal than you mean. Isn't it possible, you mean to ask, for
one single Indian, for instance, to resist the exploitation of 300
million Indians ? Or do you mean the onslaught of the whole
world against a single individual personally ?
Dr. Thurman : Yes, that is one half of the question. I
‘wanted to know if one man can hold the whole violence at bay-
Gandhiji : If he cannot, you must take it that he is not a
true representative of ahiTnsa. Supposing I cannot produce a
single instance in life of a man who truly converted his adver-
sary, I would then say that it is because no one had yet been
found to express ahimsa in its fulness.
Q, Then it overrides all other forces ?
Gandhiji : Yes, it is the only true force in life.
“ Forgive now the weakness of this question,” said Dr.
Thurman, who was absolutely absorbed in the discussion. “ For-
give the weakness, but may I ask how are we to train indivi-
duals or communities in this difBcult art ? ”
Gandhiji : There is no royal road, except through Ihdng
the creed in 3 ^our life which must be a liidng sermon. Of course,
the expression in one’s own life presupposes great study, tre-
mendous perseverance, and thorough cleansing of one’s self of
all the impurities. If for mastering of the phj^ical sciences you
have to devote a whole lifetime, how many lifetimes may be
needed for mastering the greatest spiritual force that mankind
has known ? But why worry even if it means several lifetimes ?
For, if thtg is the -only permanent thing in life, if this is the only
A TALK ON NON-VIOLENCE
115
thing that counts, then whatever effort you bestow on master-
ing it is well spent. Seek ye first the Kingdom of Heaven and
everything else shall be added unto you. The Kingdom of
Heaven is ahimsa.
Mrs. Truman had restrained herself until now. But she
could not go away without asking the question with which, she
knew, she would be confronted any day. “How am I to act,
supposing my own brother was lynched before my very eyes ? ”
“There is such a thing as self-immolation,” said Gandhiji.
^‘Supposing I was a Negro, and my sister was ravished by a
White or lynched by a whole community, what would be my
duty^? — I. ask myself. And the answer comes to me: I must
not wish ill to these, but neither must I co-operate with them.
It may be that ordinarily I depend on the lynching community
for my livelihood. I refuse to co-operate with them, refuse even
lo touch the food that comes from them, and I refuse to co-
toperate with even my brother Negroes who tolerate the v/rong.
That is the self-immolation I mean. I have often in my life re-
sorted to the plan. Of course a mechanical act of starvation will
mean nothing. One’s faith must remain undimmed whilst life
<ebbs out minute by minute. But I am a very poor specimen of
fhe practice of non-violence, and my answer may not convince
you. But I am striving very hard, and even if I do not succeed'
fully in this life, my faith will not diminish.”
Mrs. Thurman is a soulful singer, and Dr. Thurman would
not think of going away without leaving with us something to
treasure in our memory. We sat enraptured as she gave us the
two famous Negro spirituals — ‘Were you there, when they
crucified my Lord and We are climbing Jacob’s ladder ’ —
which last suited the guests and hosts equally, as it gave ex-
pression to the deep-seated hope and aspiration in the breast of
every oppressed community to climb higher and higher until
the goal was won.
And now came the parting. “We want you to come to
America,” said the guests with an insistence, the depth of love
'behind which could be measured as Mrs. Thurman reinforced
*the request with these words : “ We want you not for White
America, but for the Negroes ; we have many a problem that
•cries for solution, and we need you badly.” “How I wish I
116
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
could,” said Gandhiji. “ But I would have nothing to give you
unless I had given an ocular demonstration here of all that I
have been saying. I must make good the message here before
I bring it to you. I do not say that I am defeated, but I have
still to perfect myself. You may be sure that the moment I
feel the call within me I shall not hesitate.”
Dr. Thurman explained that the Negroes were ready to re-
ceive the message. “Much of the peculiar background of our
own life in America is our own interpretation of the Christfan
religion. When one goes through the pages of the hundreds' of
Negro spirituals, striking things are brought to my mind wliich
remind me of all that you have told us today.”
“Well,” said Gandhiji, bidding good-bye to them, “if it
comes true, it may be through the Negroes that the unadulterat-
ed message of non-violence will be, delivered to the world.”
Harijan, 14-3-1936 ' M. D.
46
THE DOOM OF PEACE
* 'i
^ [Gandhiji’s message cabled to the Editor of The CosmO’-
politan. New York, at the commencement of the Italian
invasion.]
Not to believe in the possibility of permanent peace is to dis-
believe in godliness of human nature. Methods hitherto adopted
have failed because rock-bottorn sincerity on the part of those who
have striven has been lacking. Not that they have realized thi5r
lack. Peace is unattainable by part performance of conditions,
even as chemical cofnbination is impossible without complete
fulfilment of conditions of attainment thereof. If recognized lea-
ders of mankind who have control over engines of destruction
were wholly to renounce their use with full knowledge of impli-
cations, permanent peace can be obtained. This is clearly im-
possible without the great powers of the earth renouncing their
imperialistic designs. This again seems impossible without
these great nations ceasing to believe in soul-destroying compe-
tition and to desire to multiply wants and therefore increase
their material possessions. It is my conviction that the root of
GOD OP LOVE, NOT WAR
117
the evil is want of a living faith in a living God. It is a first-
class human tragedy that peoples of the earth who claim to be-
lieve in the message of Jesus whom they describe as the Prince
of Peace show little of that belief in actual practice. It 'is pain-
ful to see 'sincere Christian divines limiting the scope of Jesus’s
message to select individuals. I have been taught from my
childhood, and I have tested the truth by experience, that pri-
mary virtues of mankind are possible of cultivation by the mean-
est of the human species. It is this undoubted universal possi-
bility that distinguishes th^ human from the rest of God’s crea-
tion. If even one great nation were unconditionally to perform
the supreme act of renunciation, many of us would see in our
lifetime visible peace established on earth.
Harijan, 16-5-1936
47
GOD OF LOVE, NOT WAR
The Statesman of Delhi has devoted four articles to an un-
measured condemnation of the no-war movement led by Canon
Sheppard and other earnest Christians in England. The paper
has dragged into its support the authority of the Bhagavadgita
in these 'words :
“Indeed the true but difficult teaching of Christianity seems
to be that society must fight its enemies but love them.
' Such,^ too, — will Mr. Gandhi please note — is the clear
teaching of the Bhagavadgita, where Krishna tells Arjuna that
victory also goes to him who fights with complete fearlessness
and is utterly devoid of hatred. Indeed, on the highest plane
the argument between the conscientious objector and the
knightly warrior is for ever settled in the second book of that
^ great classic. We have little space to quote, and the whole
poem deserves to be read not once but many times.”
The writer of the articles perhaps does not know that the
terrorist has also used in his defence the very verses quoted by
him. But the fact is that a dispassionate reading of the Bhaga-
vadgita has revealed to me a meaning wholly contrary to the
one given to it by The Statesman writer. He has forgotten that
Arjuna was no conscientious objector in the sense the Western
war-resisters are. Arjuna believed in war. He had fought the
' 118 ' NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
Kaurava hosts many times before. But he was unnerved when
the two armies were drawn lip in battle array and when he
suddenly realized that he had to fight his nearest kinsmen and
revered teachers. It was not love of man or the hatred of v/ar
that had actuated the questioner. KIrishna could give no other
answer than he did. The immortal author of the Mahabharata,
of which the Gita is one — no doubt the brightest — of the many
gems contained in that literary mine, has shown to the world the
futility of war by giving the victors an empty glory, leaving but
seven victors alive out of millions said to have been engaged in
the fight in which unnamable atrocities were used on either
side. But the Mahabharata has a better message even than the
demonstration of war as a delusion and folly. It is the spiritual
history of man considered as an immortal being and has used
with a magnifying lens a historical episode considered in his
times of moment for the tiny world round him, but in terms of
present-day values of no significance. In those days the globe
had not shrunk to a pinhead, as it has today, on which the slight-
est movement on one spot affects the whole. The Mahabharata
depicts for all time the eternal struggle that goes on daily bet-
ween the forces of good and evil in the human breast and in
which though good is ever victorious evil does put up a brave
show and baffles even the keenest conscience. It shows also the
only ‘way to right action.
But whatever the true message of the Bhagavadgita may
be, what matters to the leaders of the peace movement is not
what the Gita says but what the Bible, which is their spiritual
dictionary, says, and then too not what meaning the Church
authorities give to it, but what meaning a prayerful reading of
it yields to the reader. What matters most of all is the objec-
tors’ knowledge of the implications ‘of the law of love or ahinjsa,
inadequately rendered in English as non-violence. The articles
of The Statesman are perhaps a fair challenge to the objectors.
I am sorry I do not know enough of the movement to give a
definite opinion. My opinion need have no weight whatsoever
with the objectors. But it has, inasmuch as I loiow intimately
some of them who even correspond with me. And now they
have gone a step further in that they have adopted almost as their
text-book Mr. Richard Gregg’s book called The Power of Non-
violence which is claimed by its author to be a Western inter-
GOD OF LOVE, NOT WAR
119
pretation of what non-violence as I interpret it stands for. It
may not, therefore, be presumptuous on my part, if I set down
v/ithout argument the implications and conditions of the success
of non-violence. Here they are :
(1) Non-violence is the law of the human race and is infini-
tely greater than and superior to brute force.
(2) In the last resort it does not avail to those who do not
possess a living faith in the God of Love.
' (3) Non-violence affords the fullest protection to one’s
self-respect and sense of honour, but not always to possession
of land or movable property, though its habitual practice does
prove a better bulwark than the possession of armed men to de-
fend them. Non-violence, in the very nature of things, is of no
assistance in the defence of ill-gotten gains and immoral acts.
(4) Individuals or nations who would practise non-violence
must be prepared to sacrifice (nations to the last man) their all
except honour. It is, therefore, inconsistent with the possession
of other people’s countries, i.e., modern imperialism, which is
frankly based on force for its defence.
(5) Non-violence is a power which can be wielded equally
by all — children, young men and women or grown-up people,
provided they have a living faith in the God of Love and have
therefore equal love for all mankind. When non-violence is
accepted as the law of life it must pervade the whole being and
not be applied to isolated acts.
(6) It is a profound error to suppose that whilst the law is
good enough for individuals it is not for masses of mankind,
HarijaUj 5-9-1936
48
THE LAW OF OUR BEING
The Statesman has devoted a reasoned article to the argu-
ment advanced by me in reply to its criticism of Canon Shep-
pard’s war against war. In that article a very clever attempt
has been made to dispute the whole of the position taken up by
me.
»The writer says that whilst the Bhagavadgita assists him,
it does not assist the terrorist. Once you admit the lawfulness
of the use of physical force for purposes other than' the benefit
of the person against whom it is used as in the case of a surgeon
against his patient, you cannot draw an arbitrary line of distinc-
tion. The Mahabharata, of which the Gita is only a tiny chapter,
describes in gruesome detail a night slaughter of the innocents
which, but for our recent experiences of our civilized war, would
be considered unbelievable in actual practice. The grim fact is
that the terrorists have, in absolute honesty, earnestness and
with cogency, used the Gita, which some of them knew by heart,
in defence of their doctrine and policy. Only they have no
. answer to my interpretation of the Gita, except to sa}^ that mine
is v/rong and theirs is right. Time alone will show whose is
right. The Gita is not a theoretical treatise. It is a living but
silent guide whose directions one has to understand by patient
striving.
The Statesman writer next likens Canon Sheppard’s posi-
tion to that of Arjuna. Surely this is a faulty analogy, hastily
dra\vn, Arjuna was the commander-in-chief of the Pandava
forces. He became suddenly paralysed when he contemplated
the awful scene before him. As general he knew exactly what
he had to do. He knew that he had to war against his cousins.
His paralysis was due to momentary weakness. He could not
have given up the task before him without creating the utmost
confusion and disorder, and bringing disgrace on himself and
his inriumerable friends and followers. He was bound -to engage
himseK and his followers in the terrible slaughter for which
he had trained himself and them. It is profitless to conjecture
what would have happened if non-violence in thought, word and
deed had suddenly but really possessed him.
120
THE LAW OP OUR BEING
121
That rich possession, let us hope, has come to Dick Shep-
pard and his companions. Anyway, so far as I know, his position
is wholly different from Arjuna’s. He is no general of any army
^drawn up in battle array. He makes no distinction between
kinsmen and others. For him man is man, no matter where he
is Horn, or what his skin is, or what he calls himself. After
having prayerfully searched through the book which for him
is the Book of Life, he has been driven to the conclusion that
he may not hurt his fellow-men for gain for himself or his
country, and that therefore he must himself abstain from parti-
cipation, direct or indirect, in war. He naturally takes the next
•step of preaching to his neighbours the doctrine of peace or love
♦and goodwill towards men without exception. This is a position
which Arjuna never took up.
But The Statesman writer has many strings to his bow.
And the strongest is his denial of non-violence or love as the
jaw of the human race. If love or non-violence be not the law
of our being, the whole of my argument falls to pieces, and there
■is no escape from a periodical recrudescence of war, each suc-
‘Ceeding one outdoing the preceding one in ferocity. I cannot
undertake, and least of all through a newspaper article written
-during moments snatched from the daily routine, to prove that
love is the source and end of life. But I venture to make some
relevant suggestions which may pave the way for an under-
standing of the law. All the teachers that ever lived have
preached that law with more or less vigour. If love v/as not the
Jaw of life, life would not have persisted in the midst of death.
Life is a perpetual triumph over the grave. If there is a funda-
mental distinction between man and beast, it is the former’s
progressive recognition of the law and its application in practice
to his own personal life. All the saints of the v/orld, ancient
and modern, were, each according to his light and capacity, a
living illustration of that supreme Law of our Being. That the-
brute in us seems so often to gain an easy triumph is true
enough. That, however, does not disprove the law. It 'shows
Ihe difficulty of practice. How should it be otherwise with alaw
which is as high as Truth itseK ? When the practice of the law
becomes universal, God will reign on earth as He does in heaven.
I need not be reminded that earth and heaven are in us. We
3mow the earth, we are strangers to the heaven within us. If '
122
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
it is allowed that for some the practice of love is possible, it is:
arrogance not to allow even the possibility of its practice in all
the others. Not very remote ancestors of ours indulged in can-
nibalism and many. other practices which we would today call!
loathsome. No doubt in those days too there were Dick Shep-
pards who must have been laughed at and possibly pilloried for
preaching the (to them) strange doctrine of refusing to eat fel-
lowmen. Modem science is replete with illustrations of the
seemingly impossible having become possible within living me-
mory. But victories of physical science would be -nothing
‘against the victory of the Science of Life, which is summed up
in love which is the Law of our Being. I know that it cannot
be proved by argument. It shall be proved by persons li\dng it
in their lives in utter disregard of consequences to themselves^
There is no real gain without sacrifice. And since demonstration
of the Law of Love is the realest gain, sacrifice too must be the
greatest required.
The rest of the argument advanced by The Statesman v/riter
in refutation of mine needs no answer, if the law is recognized:
His argument is valid, if the law is denied or doubted.
One point may, however, be dealt with in passing. The
writer seems to pooh-pooh the idea of honour derived from
individual and national gain. He says : “ What is this honour
that would be left to a nation that voluntarily destroyed itself ?
There is no question for one of self-destruction, voluntary or
otherwise. But there is of ‘^a nation allowing itself to be des-
troyed” for the sake of preserving its honour, as would be a
case, say, if Indians died to a man, without lifting a finger, in
their determination not to surrender to the will of an invading
host. A woman defends her own honour and that of her sex,
when she non-violently refuses to the point of death the advances
of a rake. Young Prahlad non-violently risked his life to de-
fend his honour, which consisted in his persistence in declaring
his belief in God. Jesus defended his honour and that of man
when he preferred the death of a felon to the denial of his faith.
Harijan, 26-9-1936
49
• TEACfflNG OF HINDUISM
Referring to my recent articles on the English peace move-
ment led by Canon Sheppard, a friend writes :
"I hold the view that independently of the context of the
Gita and the preliminary conversation between Arjuna and
Shri Krishna, Hinduism does not stand decisively f -
• «e1n regard to organized invasion. It
too much to interpret all our best scriptures
Hinduism no doubt holds the spirit of compassion and love as
the very highest duty for man. But it does not preach what
you or the pacifists preach, and it is^ no good straining every-
thing into an allegory for this object.
I have admitted in my introduction to the Gita known as
Anasakti Yoga that it is not a treatise on non-violence nor was it
written to condemn war. Hinduism, as it is practised ^
has even been known to have ever been practised, has certain y
not condemned war as I do. What, however, I have done is to
put a new but natural and logical interpretation upon the whole
teaching of the Gita and the spirit of Hinduism. Hinduism, not
to speak of other religions, is ever evolving. It has no one scrip-
ture like the Quran or the Bible. Its scriptures are also evolv-
ing and suffering addition. The Gita itself is an instance^ in
Doint. It has given a new meaning to karma, sannyasa, yajna,
etc. It has breathed new Ufe into Hinduism. It has ^ven an
original rule of conduct. Not that what the Gita has given w
not implied in the previous writings, but the Gita put
plications in a concrete shape. I have endeavoured, in t e ig
of a prayerful study of the other faiths of the world an , "'v ^
is more, in the light of my own experiences in trying to ve
teaching of Hinduism as interpreted in the Gita, to give ex--
tended but in no way strained meaning to Hinduism, no a
buried in its ample scidptures, but as a living fait spea n -
a mother to her aching child. What I have done is
historical. I have followed in the footsteps of our ore a
At one time they sacrificed animals to propitiate
Their descendants, but our less remote ancestors, rea a
ent meaning into the word ‘ sacrifice ’, and t ey aug
123
0
124 . NON--VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAB
.sacrifice was meant to be of our baser self, to please not angry
_gods but the one living God within. I hold that the logical out-
come of the teaching of the Gita is decidedly for peace at the
price of life itself. It is the highest aspiration of, the human
species.
The Mahabharata and Ramayana, the two books that
millions of Hindus know and regard as their guides, are un-
doubtedly allegories as the internal evidence shows. That they
most probably deal with historical figures does not affect my
proposition. Each epic describes the eternal duel that goes on
between the forces of darkness and of light. An^^vay I must
•disclaim any intention of straining the meaning of Hinduism or
the Gita to suit an 3 '^ preconceived notions of mine. My notions
were an outcome of a study of the Gita, Ramayana, Mahabharata,
TJpanishads, etc.
Harijan, 3-10-1936
50
AHIMSA CONUNDRUMS
A college professor and two representatives of a class of
:nft 3 ^ students write :
“As you are no doubt aware, the Intermediate prose text
book, Pearce and Aiy’^atna's Models of Comparative Prose, used
in most Intermediate Colleges in India this year, contains a
selection about five pages long from your book The story of My
Experiments with Truth. The selection is entitled 'Ahimsa^
and contains your discussion of this most challenging principle
and its application to our lives.
, The fifty students in my prose class, and I, their instructor,
“have been spending several class periods studying and discuss-
ing the above essay. Naturally it has been a fruitful and sti-
mulating topic, particularly for Indian students who arc ge--
nuinely interested in their country’s welfare and future pro-
.gress. In general, we heartily agreed with your exposition of.
ahimsa^ and felt impelled to incorporate this difficult but
splendid principle into our lives.
At one point, however, both the students and I, their in-
-Structor, have been unable clearly to understand the precise
AHIMSA CONXJNDRUMS
125 -
nature of your views. I refer to your statement about the con-
duct of a votary of ahimsa in case of war, particularly the
following passage: ‘When two nations are fighting, the duty of
a votary of ahimsa is to stop the war. He who is not equal to
that duty, he who has no power of resisting war, he who is
not qualified to resist war, may take part in war and yet whole-
heartedly try to free himself, his nation, and the world from
war.’ A little further on (discussing three methods of recourse
in case of the European War, for yourself); . Or I could
participate in the war on the side of the Empire and thereby
acquire the capacity and fitness for resisting the violence of
war. I lacked this capacity and fitness, so I thought there was
nothing for it but for me to serve in the war.’
We shoiQd be deeply and humbly grateful, if you would
expand and clarify this subject and your past and present views
upon it, for the students of my class feel that they might. soon
have to decide what their attitude toward an approaching con-
flict might correctly be : whether they can adopt ahimsa and
yet conscientiously — for any reason whatsoever — take part in
' war.
I trust that you will find it convenient to answer and set.
at peace the hearts of fifty eager students and their equally
interested instructor.”
I do not know that I need have 'suppressed the name of the^
college or the names of the signatories. The learned professor-
has sent me a stamped envelop for answer. This presumes ai
personal reply. But I have only limited time at my disposal,
especially when I am nursing two precious patients. I would
not miss my weekly talk with the readers of Har'ijan. I am
therefore, vdth apologies to my correspondent, combining two;
purposes to save my time.
The question raised in the letter is of very great importance
and has always caused me the greatest difficulty, not much in
deciding upon the action to be taken at a given moment but in
justifying my conduct in terms of aliimsa. For the same action
may outwardly be taken by the believer and the unbeliever. At
these times the motive alone decides its quality.
At the time of writing I have neither the text book nor the
original in Gujarati of which the text is a translation. But I
have a recollection of what I wrote. What is more, so far as I
am aware, my views on ahimsa as I held them remain the same
today.
126 NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AITO WAR
The general proposition that I laid down in the quotation
was derived from my conduct during the European War. I had
thrown myself whole-heartedly into it at the peril of my life —
not because of the risks attendant upon serving at such times,
but because at the time I was attending drills and camps I was
suffering from pleurisy and general weakness, as I had hardly
regained the strength I had lost during an exhausting fourteen
days’ fast I had undertaken two or three months before the War.
I believed then the British Empire to be on the whole a system
beneficial to humanity. I had dreamt of one day converting it
to methods of peace instead of war for the sake even of its own
‘existence though in another form. But I was fully conscious of
my limitations. I was an insignificant atom ineffective for resist-
ance to its general policy. Whether I joined the war or not, I
was helplessly party to it inasmuch as I ate the food protected
by the British fleet. I was enjoying personal liberty too under
its protection. If, therefore, I helped the War somehow or other,
I felt that for me as a votary of ahirrisa it was better to take a
direct part in it so as to enable me the sooner to end war. It is
quite possible that all this was argument of the weak and that,
if I felt that war was an evil, I should have gone away from it
even if it meant starvation or a rebel’s death. Anyway I did
noT think so then, nor do I now.
It is wholly beside the argument what my attitude would
now be, seeing that I no longer believe in the empire as on the
whole a beneficent power.
To illustrate my answer let me take another argument from
my own life. Even when I was a little urchin my heart and in-
tellect rebelled against untouchability. But being then an in-
significant member of the family I acquiesced in their conduct
towards Harijaris, which I should not do now. Needless to say,
I could not then have argued out my conduct. My personal be-
lief did not appear to me to be inconsistent with my living in the
family.
Indeed life is made of such compromises. Ahimsa, simply
because it is purest, unselfish love, often demands such compro-
mises. The conditions are imperative. There should be no self
in one’s -aetion, no fear, no untruth, and it must be in furtherance
A DISCOURSE ON NON-VIOLENCE
127
of the c^use of ahimsa. The compromise must be- natural to
oneself, not imposed from without.
t
I should not at all wonder if my answer has given no satis-
.faction to the professor and his pupils, 1 must be pardoned for
the constant reference to my own actions. The reason is ob-
vious. I am not a well-read man in any sense of the term. All
1 know of ahimsa is in the first instance derived from my own
<experiences and experiments carried on in broad daylight in a
iiumbie scientific spirit and in the fear of God which is Truth.
Harijan, 17-10-193^
51
^ A DISCOURSE ON NON-VIOLENCE
Negro’s the Same Problem
Readers of Harijan will perhaps remember how the central
Jtopic of the members of the Negro delegation who saw Gandhiji
.about a year ago was non-violence. Two Negro gentlemen,
who came for the recent world’s meeting of the committees of
•the Y. M. C, A., also had the same question to discuss, which
shows how remarkably similar are their problems to ours ! I am
^oing to take up Dr. Tobias’ questions first, though he saw
'Gandhiji later and on his day of silence. For the long discourse '
with Prof. Mays was a kind of commentary on the brief replies
•given in writing to Dr. Tobias, and both together make up one
of the interesting talks Gandhiji often gives on the subject of
mon-violence.
“Your doctrine of non-violence has profoundly influenced
my life,” said Dr. Tobias. “ Do you believe in it as strongly as
over ? ”
“ I do indeed,” said Gandhiji. “ My faith in it is growing.”.
“ Negroes in U. S. A. — 12 million — are struggling to obtain
such fundamental rights as freedom from mob-violence, un-
restricted use of the ballot, freedom from segregation, etc. Have
you, out of your struggle in India, a word of advice and encour-
agement to give us ? ”
128
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR-
“ I had to contend against some such thing, though on a much
smaller scale, in South Africa. The difficulties are not yet oveiv
All I can say is that there is no other way than the way of non-
violence— a way, however, not of the weak and ignorant but of
the strong and wise/’
‘‘ Travancore indicates that your fuU identification with the
untouchables is bearing fruit. Do you think Travancore’s ex-
ample will be followed by other States in the near future ? ”
I shall be surprised if it is not.”
“ What word shall I give my Negro brethren as to the out-
look for the future ? ”
“With right which is on their side and the choice of non-
violence as their only weapon, if they will make it such, a bright
future is assured.”
Prof. Mays was lucky enough to find Gandhiji free in Seva-
gram to give him as much time as he wanted, and in the course
of the talk with him Gandhiji disclosed the secret of the convic-
tion of a lifetime.
As the talk proceeded, one felt as though Gandhiji was-
giving Dr. Mays what he had seen not with any of the known
senses but with a ' sixth ’ sense. I was put in mind of Rudolf
Steiner who is said to have developed a second sight. “The*
study of Mathematics,” says a writer, “reassured him, and in
geometry he experienced for the first time the existence of a real
world which is not visible to the bodily eye. The triangle he
learned about in geometry was not a particular triangle that he*
himself might draw but the essence of all triangles. This ideal
triangle could be seen with the ‘ inner eye ’ but could not be re-
produced, and this absolute idea of a geometrical figure showed
the boy that it was not wrong to ‘ see things which are not' visi-
ble to our physical sight.’ ” To Dr. Mays Gandhiji gave what
may be termed the mathematics of non-violence.
A Misnomer
“ Passive resistance,” said Gandhiji, “ is a misnomer for non-
violent resis|:ance. It is much more active than violent resistance..
It is direct, ceaseless, but three-fourths invisible and only one-
A DISCOURSE ON NON-VIOLENCE
129
fourth visible. In its visibility it seems to be ineffective, e.g. the
spinning wheel which I have called the symbol of non-violence.
In its visibility it appears ineffective, but it is really intensely
active and most effective in ultimate result. This knowledge
enables me to detect flaws' in the way in which the votaries of
non-violence are doing their spinning. I ask for more vigilance
and more imtiredness. Non-violence is an intensely active force
when properly imderstood and used. A violent man’s activity
is most visible, while it lasts. But it is always transitory. What
can be more visible than the Abyssinians done to death by
Italians ? There it was lesser violence pitted against much
greater. But if the Abyssinians had retired from the field and
allowed themselves to be slaughtered, their seeming inactivity
would have been much more effective though not for the mo-
ment visible. Hitler and Mussolini on the one hand and Stalin
on the other are able to show the immediate effectiveness of vio-
lence. But it will be as transitory as that of Chenghis’ slaughter.
But the effects of Buddha’s ndn-violent action persist and are
likely to grow with age. And the more it is practised, the more
effective and inexhaustible it becomes, and ultimately the whole
world stands agape and exclaims, ‘ a miracle has happened.’ All
miracles are due to the silent and effective working of invisible
force. Non-violence is the most invisible and the most effective.”
Can Masses ‘Be Trained?
“ I have no doubt in my mind about the superiority of non-
violence,” said Prof. Mays. “But the thing that bothers me is
about its exercise on a large scale, the difficulty of so disciplining
the mass mind on the point of love. It is easier to discipline in-
dividuals. What should be the strategy when they break out ?
Do we retreat or do we go on ? ”
“ I have had that experience,” said Gandhiji, “ in the course
of our movement here. People do not gain the training by
preaching. Non-violence cannot be preached. It has to be prac-
tised. The practice of violence can be taught to people by out-
ward symbols. You shoot at boards, then at targets, then at
beasts. Then you are passed as an expert in the art of destruc-
tion. The non-violent man has no outward weapon and, there-
fore, not only his speech but his action also seems ineffective. I
9
130
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
may say all kinds of sweet words to you v/ithout meaning them.
On the other hand I may have real love in me and yet my out-
v/ard expression may be forbidding. Then outwardly my action
in both cases may be the same and yet the effect may be diffe-
rent. For the effect of our action is often more potent when it
is not patently known. Thus the imconscious effect you are
making on me I may never know. It is, nevertheless, infinitely
greater than the conscious effect. In \doIence there is nothing
invisible. Non-violence, on the other hand, is three-fourths in-
visible, and so the effect is in the inverse ratio to its invisibility.
Non-violence, when it becomes active, travels vnth extraordin-
ary velocity, and then it becomes a miracle. So the mass mind
os affected first imconsciously, then consciously. "ViTien it be-
comes consciously affected there is demonstrable vdctorj\ In my
own experience, when people seemed to be weakening there was
no consciousness of defeat in me. Thus I was fuller of hope in
the efBcacy of non-violence after the renimciation of chdl dis-
obedience in 1922, and today I continue to be in the same hopeful
mood. It is not a mere emotional thing. Supposing I saw no
signs of dawn coming, I should not lose faith. Everything has
to come in its proper time.
“ I have discussions here with my co-workers about the
scavenging %vork we are doing. ‘Why can't we do it after
Swaraj ? ’ they say. ‘ We may do it better after Swaraj.’ I say
to them, ‘ No. The reform has to come today, it must not wait
for S%varaj ; in fact the right type of Swaraj will come only out
of such work.’ Now I cannot show you, as perhaps I caimof
show some of my co-workers, the connection between Swaraj
and scavenging. If I have to win Swaraj non-^dolentl5', I must
discipline my people. The maimed and the blind and the leprous
cannot join the army of vdolence. There is also an age-limit for
serving in the army. For a non-violent struggle there is no age-
limit ; the blind and the maimed and the bed-ridden may serve,
and not only men but women also. When the spirit of non-
violence pervades the people and actually begins to work, its
effect is visible to all.
“But now comes your poser. There are people, you say,
who do not believe in non-vdolence as you do, Afe you to sit
quiet ? The friends ask : ‘ If not now, when wU you act ? ’ I
A DISCOURSE ON NON-VIOLENCE
131
say in reply : ' I may not succeed in my lifetime, but my faith
that victory can only come through non-violence is stronger than
•ever/ When I spoke on the cult of the spinning wheel at Faizpur,
a nev/spaper correspondent imputed astuteness to me. Nothing
could be farther from my mincL When I came to Sevagram I
was told the people might not co-operate and might even boycott
me. I said : ^ That may be. But this is the way non-violence
works.’ If I go to a village which is still farther off, the experi-
ment may work better. This thing has come in my search after
the technique of non-violence. And each day that passes makes
my faith brighter. I have come here to bring that faith to frui-
tion and to die in the process if that is God’s will. Non-violence
to be worth anything has to work in the face of hostile forces.
But there may be action in inaction. And action may be vrorse
than inaction.”
^ Violence in a Spirit of LrOve ?
‘‘ Is it ever possible to administer violence in a spirit of
love ? ”
No. Never. I shall give an illustration from my own ex-
periment. A calf was lame and had developed terrible sores ;
he could not eat and breathed with difficulty. After three days’
argument with myself and my co-workers I put an end to its
life. Now that action was non-violent because it was wholly
unselfish, inasmuch as the sole purpose was to achieve the calf’s
relief from pain. Some people have called this an act of vio-
lence. I have called it a surgical operation. I should do exactly
the same thing with my child, if he were in the same predica-
ment. My point is that non-violence as the supreme law of our
being ceases to be such the moment you talk of exceptions.”
How is a minority to act against an overwhelming major-
ity ? ” asked Prol Mays.
“ I v/ould say that a minority can do much more in the way
of non-violence than a majority. I had an English friend called
Symonds. He used to say : ‘ I am with you so long as you are
in a. minority. After you are in a majority we are quits.’ I had
less diffidence in handling my minority in South Africa than I
had here in handling a majority. But it would be wholly wrong
for that reason to say that non-violence is a weapon of the weak.
The use of non-violence requires greater bravery than that of
132
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AITO WAR
violence. When Daniel defied the laws of the Meads and
Persians, his action was non-violent.”
Consequences to the Enemy
“ Should th? thought of consequences that might accrue to
the enemy as a result of your non-violence at all constrain
you?”
“ Certainly. You may have to suspend yom movement as
I did in South Africa when the Government was faced with the
revolt of European Labour. The latter asked me to make com-
mon cause with them. I said ‘ no ’.”
“And non-violence will never rebound on you, whereas
violence will be self-destroyed ? ” interposed the Professor.
“Yes. Violence must beget violence. But let me tell you
that here too my argiunent has been countered by a great man
who said : ‘Look at the history of non-violence. Jesus dies on
the cross, but his followers shed blood.’ This proves nothing.
We have no data before us to pass judgment. We do not know'
the whole of the life of Jesus. The followers perhaps had not
imbibed fully the message of non-violence. But I must warn
you against carrying the impression with you that mine is the
final word on non-violence. I know my own limitations. I
am but a humble seeker after truth. And all I claim is that
every experiment of mine has deepened my faith in non-
violence as the greatest force at the disposal of mankind. Its
use is not restricted to individuals merely, but it can be practised
on a mass scale.”
Harijan, 20-3-1937
M. D.
52
OUR FAILURE
The communal riots in Allahabad — the head-quarters of the
Congress, and the necessity of sunimoning the assistance of the
police and even the military show that the Congress has not yet
become fit to substitute the British authority. It is best to face
this naked truth, however unpleasant it may be.
The Congress claims to represent the whole of India, not
merely those few who are on the Congress register. It should
represent even those who are hostile to it and who will even
crush it, if they can. Not until we make good that claim, shall
ive be in a position to displace the British Government and func-
tion as an independent nation.
This proposition holds good whether we seek to displaice
British rule by violent action or non-violent.
Most probably by the time these lines appear in print peace
would have been established in Allahabad and the other parts.
That, however, will not take us further in our examination of the
fitness of the Congress as an organization ready to displace Bri-
tish authority in its entirety.
No Congressman will seriously doubt that the Congress is not
at the present moment capable of delivering the goods if it was
called upon to do so. If it was capable, it would not wait for the
call. But every Congressman believes that the Congress is fast
becoming such a body. The brilliant success at Haripura will be
cited as the most conclusive proof of the fact.
The riots and certain other things I can mention should make
us pause and ask ourselves whether the Congress is really grow-
ing from strength to strength. I must own that I have^belen
guilty of laying that claim. Have I been overhasty in doing so ?
It is my conviction that the phenomenal gro'i^h of the Con-
gress is due to its acceptance and enforcement, however imper-
iect, of the policy of non-violence. Time has arrived to consider
the nature of Congress non-violence. Is it non-violence of the
weak and the helpless, or of the strong and the powerfid ? If it
is the former, it will never take us to our goal and, if long pract-
133
134 -
NON-VIOLENCE. IN PEACE AND WAR
ised, may even render us for ever unfit for sep-government. The
weak and helpless are non-violent in action because they must
be. But in reality they harbour violence in their breasts and
simply await opportunity for its display. It is necessary for
Congressmen individually and collectively to examine the quality
of their non-violence. If it does not come out of real strength,
it would be best and honest for the Congress to make such a de-
claration and make the necessary changes in its behavioxir.
By this time, i.e. after seventeen years’ practice of non-
violence, the Congress should be able to put forth' a non-violent
army of volunteers numbering .not a few thousands but lacs wha
would be equal to every occasion where the police and the mili-
tary are required. Thus, instead of one brave Pashupatinath
Gupta who died in the attempt to secure peace,”' we should be
able .to produce himdreds. And a non-violent army acts unlike
armed men, as well in times of peace as of disturbances. They
would be constantly engaged in constructive activities that make
riots impossible. Theirs will be the duty of seeking occasions
for bringing warring commimities together, carrying on peace
propaganda, engaging in activities that would bring and keep
them in touch with every single person, male and female, adult
and child, in their parish or division. Such an army should be
ready to cope with any emergency, and in order to still the frenzy
of mobs should risk their lives in numbers sufficient for the pur-
pose. A few hundred, maybe a few thousand, such spotless
deaths will once for all put an end to the riots. Surely a few
hundred young men and women giving themselves deliberately
to mob fiuy will be any day a cheap and braver method of deal-
ing with such madness than the display and use of the police and
the military.
It has been suggested that when we have our independence
riots and the like will not occur. This seems to me to be an
empty hope, if in the course of the struggle for freedom we do
not understand and use the technique of non-violent action in
every conceivable circumstance. To the extent that the Con-
* The following correction by 51. D. nppc.0TC(l in the next iesue ( doted
2-4-1938 ) of Harijan : . ,
We arc «lad to have to sa,y that the ‘Statement that Shn Pn‘;hupatinatli
Gupta "was dead is incorrect. We have a tclcgratn from the Alinhnhad District
Congress Committee saying tliat though he %vas seriously stabbed he is making
satisfactory progress.”
AN APPEAL FOR SELF-EXAMINATION
135
gress ministers have been obliged to make use of the police and
the military, to that extent, in my opinion, we must admit our
failure. That the ministers could not have done otherwise is un-
fortunately only too true. I should like every Congressman, I
should like the Working Committee, to ask themselves why we
have failed, if they think with me that we have.
Harijan, 26-3-1938
53
AN APPEAL FOR SELF-EXAMINATION
[The following is a condensed summary of Gandhiji’s
opening address to the Gandhi Seva Sangh at Delang (Orissa)
on the afternoon of 25th March. M.D.I
The Creed
ICishorlalbhai, our President, who is more ill than I, has
prepared a long and well thought out address. He has dealt at
great length with our mutual misunderstandings, bickerings, our
refusal to understand and bear with one another and so oh, and
asked whether our faith is anything worth, if it does not reflect
itself more and more in our daily lives. Do we feel that we are
marching further forward every day towards our goal,? Do we
feel that we are more non-violent today than we were when we
met a year ago ? Have there been fewer occasions when we
gave way to irritation and anger ? Such questions we have to
ask ourselves ' again and* again. For the way of non-violence
and truth is sharp as the razor’s edge. Its practice is more than
our daily food. Rightly taken food sustains the body ; rightly
practised non-violence sustains the soul. The body food we can
only take in measured quantities and at stated intervals; non-
violence, which is the spiritual food, we have to take in con-
tinually. There is no such thing as satiation. I have to be
conscious every moment that I am pursuing the goal, and have
to examine myself in terms of that goal.
The very' first step in non-violence is that we cultivate in
our daily life, as between ourselves, truthfulness, humility.
136
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
tolerance, loving kindness. Honesty, they say in English, is the
best policy. But in terms of non-violence it is not mere policy.
Policies may and do change. Non-violence is an xmchangeable
creed. It has to be pursued -in face of violence raging around
you. Non-violence with a non-violent man is no merit. In fact it
becomes difiScult to say whether it is non-violence at aU.- But
when it is pitted against violence, then one realizes the differ-
ence between the two. This we cannot do unless we are ever
wakeful, ever vigilant, ever striving.
The Biots
The riots in U. P. affected me deeply. I discussed them with
Maulana Azad and the Bose brothers in teimis of non-violence.
I felt that we were getting not nearer towards our goal but
farther away from it. Haripura gave me reason to hope that
we were growing in strength, and that in spite of our shortcom-
ings we should be able to see Swaraj in my lifetime. I had
thought that we should, in the course of the year, acquire that
strength. But the riots in Allahabad and elsewhere came as a
rude shock. We were, to our shame, compelled to seek the aid
of, the police and the military.
Supposing the Viceroy were to invite the President of the
Congress to meet him and to state the Congress terms, do you
think he would have the strength to say, ‘ The Congress is cap-
able of taking charge of the administration, the British may go ?’
Do you think we could tell him that we should be able to do
without the police and the ’military, that we should be able to
come to terms with the Princes, the Zamindars and with the
Mussahnans ? I am afraid we could not honestly say that we
should easily be able to come to terms with these. And 3''et if
we have real non-violence in us, we should be able to say and
do these things.
Not the Weapon of the Weak
I therefore ask you and myself whether our non-violepce is
of the weak and not of the strong as it should be. That it can
work to a certain extent in the hands of the weak is true. It
has so worked with us. But when it becomes a cloak for our
weakness, it emasculates us. Far better than emasculation
AN APPEAL FOR SELF-EXAMINATION
137
would be the bravery of those who use physical force. Far
better than cowardice would be meeting one’s death fighting.
We were perhaps all originally brutes, and I am prepared to be-
lieve that we have become men by a slow process of evolution
from the brute. We were thus born with brute strength, but
we were born men in order to realize God who dwells in us.
That indeed is the privilege of man, and it distinguishes him
from the brute creation. But to realize God is to see Kim in all
that lives, i.e. to realize our oneness with all creation. This is
impossible unless we voluntarily shun physical force and deve-
lop conscious non-violence that is latent in every one of us.
This can only come out of strength. Have we the non-violence
of the strong ? It is open to us to discard it as an impossible
ideal and choose instead the method of violence. But the choice
has to be made.
And if it is a weapon of the strong, then there are some in-
escapable conclusions. We should be able to deal with riots and
stop the increasing tension between Hindus and Mussalmans.
What, you will ask, we as votaries of non-violence should have
done to quell these riots ? Well, it was primarily the work of the
Congress Committee to quell the riots. We should have thou-
sands of volunteers ready to serve in a crisis of this kind. In
^ 1921 we drew up a pledge for volunteers, wherein it was pro-
vided that a volunteer should be non-violent in thought, word
and deed. Hakimsaheb Ajmal Khan, who was then President,
had the same pledge accepted by the Khilafat volunteers. It
was not without difiiculty that the pledge was accepted by the
Khilafat Conference, For a volunteer to be non-violent in word
and deed was all right, some of the Maulanas said. But to ex-
pect them to be non-violent in thought was a tall order. I was
seeking, they said, to be master of their minds. I said, ‘No.
The mastery is to be of ahimsa, not of any single individual/
Ultimately they accepted the pledge. But, in spite of our hav-
ing accepted the pledge 17 years ago, we have not developed the
irresistible strength that such acceptance of ahimsa means. The
reason is that we have not troubled, we have not laboured, to
organize such a non-violent volunteer army. If we cannot do
so, if we cannot carry out the pledge, it would be well to recon-
sider our position. The tragedy is that the pledge is still in
138
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
existence, but it exists on paper. If we had on a sufficient scale-
such a non-violent army as the pledge contemplates, we should
not have had these riots ; and if there had been, they would have
quelled the riots or immolated themselves in the attempt. We
have heard of only one who met his death, I admire his self-
immolation. But my breast would have swelled with joy, if
there had been several Guptas,
Do you think this is an empty dream? Do you think we
cannot quell the riots even with such a non-violent army ? If
you really think so, if that is the conclusion that you arrived at
after calm and dispassionate thinking, you must also conclude
that Swaraj cannot be attained by means of non-violence.
Harijan, 2-4-1938
54
THE CHOICE
My remarks arising out of the recent riots in U. P. have
attracted much attention. Friends have sent me cuttings from
the Press. This is some of the criticism printed or spoken :
(1) My writing betrayed hysteria.
(2) I wrote -without sufficient data.
(3) I had recanted my views on non-cooperation and civil
resistance.
(4) I had been driven to the policy of the Liberals.
(5) Con^essmen had never adopted non-violence as bet-
ween themselves.
(6) I was expecting the impossible from human nature.
(7) If my position was accepted, Swaraj would never be*
obtained, for all India could never become non-violent.
There is much more I could cull from the criticism. I have
only taken the relevant parts.
1. If my article betrayed hysteria, the symptoms stiU
persist, for in spite of the criticism which 1 have studied with
the care it demanded, I see nothing to change the position I have
THE CHOICE
139’
taken up. The critics should remember that my proposition was
specific and narrow. Swaraj could not be obtained through
non-violent means imless our non-violence was of the brave and
such as to be able to deal effectively with violence. I have not
maintained that it could not be obtained by other means. But
if it could be so obtained, we were not ready to deliver the goods,
for we were not ready for matching our force against the
British.
2. All the data required were that there were riots, no
matter on how small a scale, that Congressmen were not able
4o deal with them non-violently, and that the aid of the police
and the military had to be summoned. There was no dispute
about these three broad facts. They were enough to enable me
to draw the conclusions I did. In this there was no reflection
on the ministers, I have admitted that they could not have
acted otherwise. The fact, however, remains that the Congress
non-violence was 'not able to cope with the emergency,
3. There is nothing in my article to warranty the inferen^^e
that I had lost my faith in non-cooperation and civil resistance.
All I need say is that it is brighter than ever. The two are quite
enough to bring Swaraj, provided that non-violence practised
is of the bravest.
4. I wish I could be drawn towards the policy of the
Liberals. I have many personal friends among them. But they
have no sanction. I claim that I have an infallible sanction.
My article was written to show that during the riots it was no
the sanction that had failed, the failure was of the organization
which had accepted tke sanction, namely, active, constructive-
non-violence.
5. I can only refer the critics to the many resolutions of
the Congress which do not confine the use of non-violence on y
towards Englishmen. Indeed I remember having many cUscus-
sions at the Working Committee meetings at whic e nece
sity of non-violence among ourselves was emphasize
6. Well, human nature has hitherto responded nobly to the
call of non-violence. But I am concerned with the ^
ture. Congressmen have to sign a pledge which commi s
to non-violence. My question was and is have t ey non
140
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAB
Isnce in them? If they have, is it of the brave? My thesis is
that, if it is of the brave, it should be enough for dealing with
the riots and for delivering the goods,
7. This is answered in the foregoing.
But I have the fear that our non-violence is not of the kind
required. Congressmen may not treat my warning lightly.
After all I am supposed to be the Congress expert, however in-
efficient, on non-violence. I have confidence in m3’' readings and
rny remedies. I cite Ahmedabad and Viramgam \doIence, Bom-
bay violence during the Prince’s visit, and Chauri Chaura on
the eve of Bardoli. The results have amply justified the reme-
dies applied at my instance, though on these occasions critics
were not wanting who had expressed their strong disapproval
of the suspensions. I have no doubt about my present diagnosis
about the remedies. The remedies are not beyond our abilit5%
if we have a living conviction about non-violence and its nature.
Here are some of the remedies :
1. We must discover a solution for the Hindu Muslim ten-
sion. I use that expression deliberately instead of ‘communal’
— for, if we find this, the other will follow as a matter of course.
2. There must be a purging of the Congress registers so as
to make them proof against bogus voters. From all accounts I
receive, our registers contain too many bogus names to be called
at all accurate.
3. Congressmen m\ist not be afraid to find themselves in a
minority.
4. ^Without delay every Provincial Congress Committee
should raise a proper corps of volunteers pledged to non-vio-
lence in thought, word and deed. And there should be a manual
of instruction as to training etc., prepared for imiversal use.
There is nothing heroic or impracticable in these sugges-
tions. But they are impracticable, if those who lead have no
living faith in non-violence. If they have not,^the sooner non-
violence is removed from the Congress vocabulaiy the better it
is for the Congress and the nation. The alternative is certainly
not imadulterated violence. The Congress is the only political
-organization in the world which has, at m3’' instance, adopted
imadulterated non-violence for the attainment of Swaraj. It- is
MARTIAL V. MORAL
141
its only sanction.- I dare to say that, if its quality is not what it
should be, it will do great harm to the nation. In the last heat
we may be found to be -cowards instead of brave men and women.
And there is no disgrace greater than cowardice for fighters for
freedom. Surely there is nothing to be ashamed of in retracing
our steps. If we feel that we shall not be able to displace the
British power without a violent struggle, the Congress must say
so to the nation and prepare accordingly. We must do what is
being done all the world over — ‘ forbear when we can, hit when
we must.’ If that is to be our creed or policy, we have lost pre-
cious seventeen years. But it is never too late to learn and
mend. Seventeen years in the life of a nation is nothing. It
will go hard with Congressmen, if having received the warning'
they do not make the choice.
Harijan, 9-4-1938
55
MARTIAL V. MORAL
It is often forgotten that the Congress has only moral autho-
rity to back it. The ruling power has the martial, though it
often dilutes the martial with the moral. This vital difference
has come to fore since the assumption of office by the Congress
in seven provinces. This office-holding is a step towards either
greater prestige or its total loss. If it is not to be a total loss,
the ministers and the legislators have to be watchful* of their
own personal and public conduct. They have to be, like
Caesar’s wife, above suspicion in everything. They may not
make private gains either for themselves or for their relatives
or friends. If the relatives or friends get any appointment, it
must be only because they are the best among the candidates,
and their market value is always greater than what they get
under the Government. The ministers and the legislators of the
Congress ticket have to be fearless in the performance of their
duty. They must always be ready to risk the loss of their seats
or offices. Offices and seats in the legislatures have no merit
outside their ability to raise the prestige and power of the
142 NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
<;!ongress. And since both depend wholly upon the possession of
morals, both public and private, any moral lapse means a blow
to the Congress. This is the necessary implication of non-vio-
lence. If the Congress non-violence is merely conJSned to ab-
stention from causing physical hurt to the British officials and
their dependants, such non-violence can never bring us indepen-
•dence. It is bound to be worsted in the final heat. Indeed, we
shall find it to be worthless, if not positively harmful, long be-
fore the final heat is reached.
There is considerable force in the argument of those who
have conceived Congress non-violence in that narrow light when
they say that it is a broken reed.
If on the other hand non-violence, with all the implications,
is the Congress policy, let every Congressman examine himself
and reconstruct himseK accordingly. Let him not wait for in-
structions from the Working Committee. After all the Work-
ing Committee can act only in so far as it interprets the public
mind. And non-violence is not a quality to be evolved or ex-
pressed to order. It is an inward growth depending for susten-
ance upon intense individual effort.
I have received several letters offering the writers’ names
for enrolment as volunteers ready to immolate themselves at
times of rioting and the like. To these \vTiters I would suggest
that they enlist co-workers themselves, form local corps, and
begin training in accordance vnth the suggestion I have made.
Let them not confine themselves merely to preparedness for
emergencies, but for the daily walk of life in all its departments,
personal, domestic, social, economic, political, religious. Only
thus will they find themselves more than ready for dealing %vith
emergencies in their own localities or beats. They may not
aim, except indirectly, at influencing events happening hundreds
of miles away from their scene of activity. That ability v/ill
come, if the right beginning is made in the first instance.
Harijan, 23-4-1938
. 56
MORE POSERS
Nowadays Gandhiji hardly enters into discussions on acade-
.mic questions, if only for the reason that he has very little time
for this. But in Peshawar, where he saw so many new faces
and where though he had not the health he had some time back,
he answered questions of a more or less academic character.
'Take the following from a professor ; “ How is it,” he asked,
■“that many of the English pacifists are talking of defence and
elaborate plans of defence ?” And, “ May it not be possible to
carry pacifism too far ? Supposing Abyssinia had simply non-
resisted and said to Italy, ‘ Do your worst,’ would the Italians
have been ashamed and desisted from their design ? Lansbmy
said they would.”
“ I shall take up the Abyssinian question first,” said
Gandhiji. ‘‘I can answer it only in terms of active, resistanj^
non-violence. Now non-violence is the activest force on earth,
^nd it is my conviction that it never fails. But if the Abyssin-
ians had adopted the attitude of non-violence of the strong, i.e.,
the non-violence which breaks to pieces but never bends, Musso-
lini would have had no interest in Abyssinia. Thus if they had
simply said : ‘You are welcome to reduce us to dust or ashes,
but you will not find one Abyssinian ready to co-operate with
you,’ what could Mussolini have done ? He did not want a-
desert. Mussolini wanted submission and not defiance, anddf
he had met with the quiet,’ dignified and non-violent defiance
that I have described, he would certainly have been obliged to
retire. Of course, it is open to anyone to say that human nature
has not been known to rise to such height. But if we have made
unexpected progress in physical sciences, why may we do less
in the science of the soul ?
‘‘Now about the English pacifists, I know there are some
great and sincere men amongst them, but they are thinking in
terms of pacifism as distinguished from imadulterated non-vio-
lence. I am essentially a non-violent man, and I believe in war
bereft of every trace of violence. An essentially non-violent .
143
144 NON-VIOLKNCE IN PEACE AND WAR
man does not calculate the- consequences. The English pacifists
you are talking of calculate, and when they speak of pacifism
they do so with the mental reservation that when pacifism fails
arms might be used. With them not non-violence but arms are
the ultimate sanction, as' was the case with Woodrow Wilson’s
Fourteen Points. No, someone has to arise in England with the
h'ving faith to say that England, whatever happens, shall not
use arms. . They are a nation fully armed, and if they having the
power deliberately refuse to use arms, theirs will be the first
example of Christianity in active practice on a mass scale. That
will be a real miracle.”
Harijan, 14-5-1938 M. D.
57
QUALIFICATIONS OF A PEACE BRIGADE
Some time ago I suggested the formation of a peace brigade
whose members would risk their lives in dealing with riots,
especially communal. The idea was that this brigade should
substitute the police and even the milita^ 5 ^ This reads ambi-
tious. The achievement may prove impossible. Yet, if the
Congress is to -succeed in its non-violent struggle, it must deve-
lop, the power to deal peacefully with such situations. Commu-
nal riots are engineered by politically-minded men. Many of
those who take part in them are xmder the influence of the latter.
Surely it should not be. beyond the wit of Congressmen to devise
a method or methods of avoiding ugly communaL situations by
peaceful means. I say this irrespective of whether there is or
there is not a communal pact. It cannot be that any party seeks
to force a pact by violent means. Even if such a pact were a
possibility, it would not be worth the paper on which it might
be written. For behind such a pact there will be no common
understanding. What is more, even after a pact is arrived at it
would be too much to expect that there would never be any
commimal riots.
Let us, therefore, see what qualifications a member of the
contemplated peace brigade should possess.
QUAUFICATTONS OF A PEACE BRIGADE
145
1. He or she must have a living faith in non-violence. This
is impossible without a living faith in God. A non-violent man
can do nothing save by the power and grace of God. Without it
he won’t have the courage to die without anger, without fear
and without retaliation. Such courage comes from the belief
that God sits in the hearts of all, and that there should be no
fear in the presence of God. The knowledge of the omnipre-
sence of God also means respect for the lives of even those
who may be called opponents or goondas. This contemplated
intervention is a process of stilling the fury of man when the
brute in him gets the mastery over him.
2. This messenger of peace must have equal regard for aU
the principal religions of the earth. Thus, if he is a Hindu, he
will respect the other faiths current in India. He must, there-
fore, possess a knowledge of the general principles of the diffe-
rent faiths professed in the country.
3. Generally speaking this work of peace can only be done
by local m^n in their own localities.
4. The work can be done singly or in groups. Therefore
no one need wait for companions. Nevertheless one would na-
tiirally seek companions in one’s, own locality 'and form a local
* brigade.
5. This messenger of peace will cultivate, through personal
service, contacts with the people in his locality or chosen circle,
so that when he appears to deal with ugly situations, he does not
descend upon the members of a riotous assembly as an utter
stranger liable to be looked upon as a suspect or an unwelcome
visitor.
6. Needless to say, a peace-bringer mu^t have a character
beyond reproach and must be known for his strict impartiality.
7. Generally there are previous warnings of coming storms.
If these are known, the peace brigade will not wait till the con-
flagration breaks out, but will try to handle the situation in
anticipation.
8. Whilst, if the movement spreads, it might be well if
there are some whole-time workers, it is not absolutely necessary
that there should be. The idea is to have as many good and
true men and women as possible. These can be had only if
10
146
NO^-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AITO WAR
voluiit 06 rs are dra'v^ni firom those who are engaged in various
walks of life but have leisure enough to cultivate friendly rela-
tions with the people li\dng in their circle and otherwise possess
the qualifications required of a member of the peace brigade,
9. There should be a distinctive dress worn by the mem-
bers of the contemplated brigade so that in course of the time
they v/ill be recognized without the slightest difficult^-.
These are but general suggestions. Each centre can work
out its ovm constitution on the basis here suggested.
Lest false hopes may be raised, I must warn workers
against entering the hope that I can play any active part in the
formation of peace brigades. I have not the health, energy or
time for it. I find it hard enough to cope wdth the tasks I dare
not shirk, I can only guide and^make suggestions through cor-
respondence or these columns. Therefore let those who appre-
ciate the idea and feel they have the ability, take the initiative
themselves. I know that the proposed brigade has great possi-
bilities, and that the idea behind it is quite capable of being
worked out in practice.
Harijan, 18-6-1938
58
THE QUESTION OF QUESTIONS t
Dr. Kalidas Nag, who is often inwted abroad on culture
missions and who is about to sail shortly for ^Australia, broke
joumej’' here on his way to Calcutta. “Wherever I have been,”
he said, “even in that'^vrongly called ^ Pacific^ region, non-vio-
lence is the question of questions. But it is just a question or a
matter of doubt, — though even that should be enough — doubt
that the weapon of \dolence by which the 3 " had set so much store
up to now may not be their salvation. But, on the other hand,
they also ask, has not Buddhism been responsible for widespread
emasculation? And w^hatever may he the potency' of non-vio-
lence, is it not impossible as a weapon of defence ? ”
“ Do you vraut me to ans^ver these questions ? ” asked
Gandhiji, “ or did you reply to them ? ”
THE QUESTION OP QUESTIONS
147
nave been replying to them after my own historical
fashion, but I want you to answer them, for yours will be
authentic ansv/ers, I have been trying to show them that even
though there have been wars and crusades and so on, on the
surface, there has been throughout history a demonstrable
undercurrent of non-violence. But when I go again I can give
them your answer.”
“Well,” said Gandhiji, after a slight pause, “the answer is
43eing given in India in actual practice. It is no use citing the
example of China and Japan. India is the only place where
an answer, if it must come, can come. Experience here is quite^
jencouraging. Intellectually, of course, even many people in
the West have come to recognize the futility of violence, and
have begim to ask if non-violence may not after all be worth a
trial. Dr. Stanley Jones has sent me a copy of his recent article
— Gandhian Solution of the Chinese Trouble — and he has seri-
ously discussed various forms of non-cooperation that may be
successfully adopted. There was a time when Dr. Jones had
not much belief in non-cooperation, but he now seriously sug-
gests it as a non-violent solution, and has pressed me to go
to Europe to preach peace. But so long as my mission in India
remains unfulfilled, my visit to the West on a peace mission
must be a vain effort. Whilst it is true that non-violence has
made^ much headway in India, it is not of much value to an
outsider and a critic at that.”
“What you say, Mahatmaji, is quite correct, viz. that the
answer is being given, and if it is really given on such a scale
as the size of our country, it will be most effective. For their
acceptance — even intellectual — of non-violence and non-cooper-
ation is in a spirit of condescension.”
“It is impossible,” said Gandhiji, “that a thing essentialljr
of the soul can ever be imparted through the intellect. It is just
like trying to import faith in God through the intellect. It can-
not be, as it is essentially a matter of heart. Faith can be turned,
into knowledge by experience, and it can come only through
the heart and not the intellect. The intellect, if anything, acts
as a barrier in matters of faith.”
Harijan, 18-6-1938
M. D.
59
MESSAGE TO CHINA
Prof. Tao would not go without a message from Gandhiji
for the people of China. He explained that even a non-violent
message would be welcome, for the Chinese were not averse to
non-violence. They were engaged in a war of self-defence, but
in other respects they were observing non-violence. Thus they
would never touch non-combatants. They had no enmity
against the Japanese people. On May 20 Chinese planes had
flown, over Japanese towns, and they might easily have spread
death and destruction among the people of Japan in retaliation
for the bombing of so many Chinese ports by Japan. But
instead of raining bombs they rained handbills and leaflets
showing the wrong of the war. It was a unique phenomenon,
for, as Dr, Kimg had said, “we refrained . from purely humani-
tarian groimds ; our enemies are not the Japanese people but
the Japanese militarists.” In this, said Prof, Tao, they were but
following the principle of non-violence.
“ But,” wrote Gandhiji in reply, " the self-inflicted restraint
• will not last when the real stress comes. The temptation will
be irresistible. I shall not be surprised. It is inevitable. There
is no love in war. We have got to come to the conclusion that
there is to be either complete non-violence or imdiluted vio-
lence. Is not this enough message ?”
Prof. Tao wondered if some day the Chinese might expect
to have Gandhiji in their midst.
• “I almost came to your coimtry,” wrote Gandliiji, “when
those who had invited me had to stop me from going owing to
the disturbances that had taken plpce. I do want to see peace
reigning in your land during my lifetime. Nothing will please
me better than to visit your great country some day.”
Harijan, 27-8-1938 M. D. ’
148
60
LOGICAL CONSEQUENCE
One must feel happy that the danger of war has been averted
for the time being. Is the price paid likely to be too great ?
Is it likely that honour has been sold ? Is it a triumph of
organized violence ? Has Herr Hitler discovered a new tech-
nique of organizing violence which enables him to gain his end
without shedding blood ? I do not profess to know European
politics. But it does appear to me that small nationalities can-
not exist in Europe with their heads erect. They must be
absorbed by their larger neighbours. They must become
vassals.
Europe has sold her soul for the sake of a seven days’ earthly
existence. The peace Europe gained at Munich is a triumph of
violence; it is also its defeat. If England and France were sure
of victory, they would dertainly have fulfilled their duty of sav-
ing Czechoslovakia or of dying with it. But they quailed before
the combined violence of Germany and Italy. But what have
Germany and Italy gained ? Have they added anything to the
moral wealth of mankind ?
In penning these lines my concern is not with the great
powers. Their height dazes me. Czechoslovakia has a lesson
for me and us in India. The Czechs could not have done any-
thing else when they found themselves deserted by their, two
powerful allies. And yet I have the hardihood to say that, if
they had known the use of non-violence as a weapon for the
defence of national honour, they would have faced the whole
might of Germany with that of Italy thrown in. They would
have spared England and France the humiliation of suing for
a peace which was no peace ; and to save their honour they
would have died to a man without shedding the blood of the
robber. I must refuse to think that such heroism, or call it
restraint, is beyond human natiue. Human nature will only find
itself when it f ully realizes that to be human it has to cease
to be beastly or brutal. Though we have the hrnnan form, with-
out the attainment of the virtue of non-violence, we still share
149
ISO NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
the qualities of our remote reputed ancestor, the orangoutang.
These are not idle words I am viTiting. Let the Czechs know
that the "Working Committee wrung itself with pain' while their
doom was being decided. The pain was quite selfish in a way.
But, on that account it was the more real. For though numerically
we are a big nation, in terms of Europe, i.e. in terms of orga-
nized scientific violence, we are smaller than Czechoslovakia.
Our liberty is not merely threatened, we are fighting to regain
it. The Czechs are fully armed ; we are wholly xmarmed. And so
the Committee sat to deliberate what its duty was by the Czechs,
what part the Congress was to play if the war cloud burst on us.
Were we to bargain with England for om liberty and appear to
befriend Czechoslovakia, or were we to live up to the creed of
non-violence and say in the hour of trial for afflicted humanity
that, consistently with our creed, we could not associate ourselves
with war even though it might ostensibly be for the defence of
Czechoslovakia whose very existence was threatened for nO
fault of hers, or for the only fault that she was too small tb
defend herself single-handed ? The Working Committee had al-
most come to the conclusion that it would deny itself the oppor-
tunity of striking a bargain with England, but would make its
contribution to the world peace, to the defence of Czechoslo-
vakia and to India’s freedom by declaring to the v/orld by its
action that the way to peace with honour did not lie through
the mutual slaughter of the innocents, but that it lay only and
truly through the practice of organized non-riolence" even unto
death.
And this was but the logical and natiual step the Working
Committee could have taken, if it was to prove true to its creed.
If India could gain her freedom through non-violence, as Con-
gressmen are to believe they can, she could also defend her free-
dom by the same means, and hence a fortiori could a smaller
nation like Czechoslovakia.
I do not know what actually the Working Committee v/ould
have done if the war had come.' But the v/ar is only postponed.
During the breathing time, I present the way of non-violence for
acceptance by the Czechs. They do not yet know xvhat is in store
for them. They can lose nothing by trying the way of non-
riolence. The fate of Jlepublican Spain is hanging in the balance.
IP I WERE A CZECH
151
So is that of China. If in the end they all lose, they will do so
not because their cause is not just, but because they are less
skilled in the science of destruction or because they are under-
manned. What would Republican Spain gain if it had Franco’s
resources, or China if she had Japan’s skill in war or, the Czechs
if they had the skill of Herr Hitler ? I suggest that, if it is brave,
as it is, to die to a man fighting against odds, it is braver still
to refuse to fight and yet to refuse to yield to the usurper. If
death is a certainty in either case, is it not nobler to die with
the breast bared to the enemy without malice against him
within ?
Harijan, 8-10-1938
61
IF I WERE A CZECH
If I have called the arrangement with Herr Hitler ‘peace
without honour’, it was not to cast any reflection on British or
French statesmen. I have no doubt that Mr. Chamberlain could
not think 'of anything better. He knew his nation’s limitations.
He wanted to avoid war, if it could be avoided at all. Short of
going to war, he pulled his full weight in favour of the Czechs.
That it could mot save honour was no fault of his. It would be
so every time there is a struggle with Herr Hitler or Signor
Mussolini.
It cannot be otherwise. Democracy dreads to spill blood. The
philosophy for which the two dictators stand calls it cowardice
to shrink from carnage. They exhaust the resources of poetic
art in order to glorify organized murder. There is no humbug
about their word or deed. They are ever ready for war. There is
nobody in Germany or Italy to cross their path. Their word is
law.
It is different with Mr. Chamberlain or M. Daladier. They
have their Parliaments and Chambers to please. They have
parties to confer with. They cannot maintain themselves on a
152
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
perpetual war footing, if their language is to have a democratic
accent about it. ' {
Science of war leads one to dictatorship pure and simple.
Science of non-violence can alone lead one to pure democracy.
England, France and America have to make their choice. That
is the challenge of the two dictators.
Russia is out of the picture just now. Russia has a dictator
who dreams of peace and thinks he will wade to it through a sea
of blood. No one can say what^Russian dictatorship will mean to
the world.
It was necessary to give this introduction to what I want
to say to the Czechs and through them to all those nationalities
which are called ‘small’ or ‘weak’. 1 want to speak to the
Czechs because their plight moved me to the point of physical
and mental distress, and I felt that it would be cowardice on my
part not to share with them the thoughts that were welling up
within me. It is clear that the small nations must either come
or be ready to come imder the protection of the dictators or bo
a constant menace to the peace of Europe. In spite of all the
goodwill in the world England and France cannot save them.
Their intervention can only mean bloodshed and destruction
such as has never been seen before. If I were a Czech, therefore,
I- would free these two nations from the obligation to defend my
country. And yet I must live. I would not be a vassal to any
nation or body. I must have absolute independence or perish. To
seek to win in a clash of arms would be pure bravado- Not so,
if in defying the might of one who would deprive me of my
independence I refuse to obey his will and perish unarmed iu
the attempt. In so doing, though I lose the body, I save my soul,
i, e. my honour.
This inglorious peace should be my opportunity- I must live
down the humiliation and gain real independence.
But says a comforter, “ Hitler knows no pity. Your spiritual
effort will avail nothing before him.”
My answer is : “ You may be right. History has no record of
a nation having adopted non-violent, resistance. If Hitler is un-
affected by my suffering, it does not matter. For I shall have lost
nothing worth. My honour is the only thing wofth preserving.
IF I WERE A CZECH
153
That is independent of Hitler’s pity. But as a believer
in non-violence I may not limit its possibilities. Hitherto he and
his likes have built upon their invariable experience that men
yield to force. Unarmed men, women and children offering non-
violent resistance without any bitterness in them will be a novel
experience for them. Who can dare say it is not in their nature
to respond to the higher and finer forces ? They have the same
.soul that I have.”
But says another comforter, ‘‘What you say is all right for
you. But how do you expect your people to respond to the novel
call ? They are trained to fight. In personal bravery they are
second to none in the world. For you now to ask them to throw
.away their arms and be trained for non-violent resistance seems
to me to be a vain attempt.”
“ You may be right. But I have a call I must answer. I must
deliver my message to my people. This humiliation has sunk too
■deep in me to remain without an outlet. I, at least, must act up
to the light that has dawned on me.”
This is how I should, I believe, act if I was a Czech. When
I first launched out on satyarp^dha, I had no companion. We
were thirteen thousand men, women and children against a
whole nation capable of crushing the existence out of us. I did
not know who would listen to me. It all came as in a flash. All
the 13,000 did not fight. Many fell back. But the honour of the
nation was saved. New history was written by the South African
Csatyayralia,
A more apposite instanfce, -perhaps, is that of Khansaheb
Abdul Gaffar Khan, the servant of God as he calls himself, the
pride of Afghan as the Pathans delight to call him. He is sitting
in front of me as I pen these lines. He has made several
thousands of his people throw down their arms. He thinks he
' has imbibed the lesson of non-violence. He is not sure of his
people. I reproduce below the pledge that his soldiers of peace
make. I have come to the Frontier Province, or rather he has
brought me, to see with my own eyes what his men here are
doing. I can say in advance and at once that these men know
very little of non-violence. All the treasure they have on earth
is their faith in their leader. I do not cite these soldiers of peace
as at all a finished illustration. I cite them as an honest attempt
154
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
being made by a soldier to convert fellow soldiers to the ways.
of peace. I can testify that it is an honest attempt, and whether
in the end it succeeds or fails, it will have its lessons for satya-
grahis of the future. My purpose will be fulfilled, if I succeed in
reaching these men’s hearts and making them see that, if their
non-violence does not make them feel much braver than the
possession of arms and the ability to use them, they must give
up their non-violence, which is another name for cowardice, and
resume their arms, which there is nothing but their own wiU
to prevent them from taking back.
I present Dr. Benes with a weapon not of the weak but of
the brave. There is no bravery greater than a resolute refusal
to bend the knee to an earthly power, no matter how great, and
that without bitterness of spirit and in the fullness of faith that
the spirit alone lives, nothing else does.
Peshawar, 6-10-38
The EIhudai Khidmatgar’s Pledge
The following is a free translation of the pledge which-
every Kiudai Khidmatgar signs before enrolment :
In presence of God I solemnly affirm that :
1. I hereby honestly and sincerely offer myself for enrol-
ment as a Khudai Khidmatgar.
2. I shall be ever ready to sacrifice personal comfort, pro-
perty, and even life itself to serve the nation and for the attain-
ment of my cormtry’s freedom.
3. I shall not participate in factions, nor pick up a quarrel
■with or bear enmity towards anybod 3 \ I shall always protect
the oppressed against the tyraimy of the oppressor.
4. I shall not become member of any other organization,
and shall not furnish security or tender apology in the course of
the non-violent fight.
5. I shall always obey every legitimate order of my-
superior officers.
6. I shall always live up to the principle of non-violence.
7. I shall serve all hmnanity equally. The chief objects of
my life sh^ be attainment of complete independence and reli-
gious freedom.
WOMAN'S SPECIAL MISSION
i5sr.
8. I shall always observe truth and purity in all my actions.
9. I shall expect no remuneration for my services.
10. All my services shall be dedicated to God, they shall not
be for attaining rank or for show.
Harijan, 15-10-1938
62
WOMAN^S SPECIAL MISSION
The Editor, Harijan
Sir,
I have read your articles on the recent European crisis withi
great joy. It was only natural that you should speak to Europe-
now. How could you restrain yourself when humanity was on
" the very verge of destruction?
Will the world listen? That is the question.
There is no doubt — judging from letters from friends In.
England — that people there went through absolute agony during
that ghastly week, I am sure the same applies to the whole ^
world. The mere thought of war — ^modern warfare— with its
devilish ingenuity and consequent pitiless butchery and beastia-
lity — definitely made people think as they had never thought
before. “The sigh of relief that was breathed and the gratitude to-
God that went up from every heart when the news came through,
that war had been averted, are something that I can never-
forget as long as I live,*’ writes an English friend. And yet is
it just the fear of unspeakable suffering, the dread of losing
one’s nearest and dearest, of seeing one’s country humiliated,
that cause one to detest war? Are we glad war has been averted
even at the humiliation of another nation? Would we have felt
differently, if the sacrifice of honour had been demanded of us?'
, Do we hate war because we realize it is the wrong way to settle
disputes, or is our hatred of it part and parcel of our fear?*
These are questions that must be answered in the right way, if
war is really to vanish from the earth. ^
The crisis over, however, what do we see? A more strenuous
race than before for armaments, a more comprehensive and"
intensive organization than ever of all the resources available —
of men, women, money, skill and talent — in the event of war!
No avowed declaration that “war shall not be” from an^herel
156
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
Is this not a recognition that war— however averted today— is
still hanging over our heads as the proverbial sword of Damocles?
To me as a woman it is painful to realize that my sex has
not contributed to world peace the quota that should be ours by
instinct and prerogative to contribute. It pains me to read and
hear of women’s auxiliary corps being organized, of women being
commandeered and volunteering to take their full share in the
actual fields as well as behind the lines. And yet, when war
comes, it is the women’s hearts that are wrung in agony, it is
their souls that are scarred beyond repair. It is all so inexplic-
able. Why is it that we have not chosen the better part through
all the ages? Why have we, without murmur, bowed the knee
to hideous, soulless, brute force? It is a sad commentary on
our spiritual development. We have failed to understand our
high calling. I am quite convinced that, if women could only
have a heart-understanding of the power and glory of non-
violence, all would be well with the world.
Why cannot you inspire and organize us women of India?
Why will you not concentrate on having us as your ^sword arm7
How often have I longed for you to undertake an all India tour
just for this purpose? I believe that you would have a wonder-
ful response, for the heart of Indian womanhood is sound, and
no women, perhaps, in the world have finer traditions of sacri-
fice and self-effacement behind them as we. Perhaps if you
would make something of us, we may, in however humble a man-
I ner, be able to show the way of peace to a sorrowing and stricken
world. Who knows?
22-10-1938 A WOMAN
I publish this letter not without hesitation. The corres-
pondent's faith in my ability to stir the woman heart flatters
■me. But I am humble enough to recognize my limitations. It
seems to me that the days of my touring are over. Wliatever I
'Can do by writing I must continue’ But my faith is increasing
in the efficacy of silent prayer. It is by itself an art — ^perhaps the
highest art requiring the most refined deligence. I do believe
lhat it is woman’s mission to exhibit ahimsa at its highest and
best. But why should it be a man to move the woman’s heart ?
If the appeal is addressed exclusively to me not as man but as
the (supposed to be) best exponent of ahimsa to be practised
on a mass scale, I have no urge in me to go about preaching the
•doctrine to the women of India. I can assure my correspondent
"that there is no want of will in me that deters me from respond-
ing to her appeal. My feeling is that, if men of the Congress can
jcetain * their faith in ahimsa and prosecute the non-violent
WHY NOT GREAT POWERS?
157'
programme faithfully and fiilly, the women will be automatically
converted. And it may be that there shall arise one among them,
who will be able to go much further than I can ever hope to do.
For woman is more fitted than man to make explorations and
take bolder action in ahimsa. For the courage of seif-sacrifice-
woman is any day superior to man, as I believe man is to woman,
for the courage of the brute.
Bannu, 25-10-38
Harijan, 5-11-1938
63
WHY NOT GREAT POWERS ?
In the criticisms on my recent writings on the plight of
Czechoslovakia, I have observed one thing which demands an>
answer.
Some critics argue that, if the non-violent remedy I have
suggested for the Czechs is only for comparatively weak be-
cause small nations like them and not for the great powers like-
England or France or America, it cannot be of much value, if
any.
Now if the critics will re-read my article, they will see that
I have refrained from suggesting it to these big powers because
of their bigness, in other words, because of my timidity. But
there was a more pbtent reason for my not addressing them.
They were not' in distress and therefore in no need of any re-
medy. To use a medical expression, they were not ailing as Cze-
choslovakia was. Their existence was not threatened, as Czecho-
slovalda’s was. Any appeal from me, therefore, to the great
powers would have amounted to an empty and imwanted
sermon.
By experience I have also found that people rarely^ become
virtuous for virtue’s sake. They become virtuous from necessity.
Nor is there anything wrong in a man becoming good under
pressure of circumstances. It would be no doubt better, if he
becomes good for its own sake.
258 NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
The Czechs were' given a choice either to surrender peace-
.fully to Germany’s might or to fight single-handed and risk al-
most certain destruction. It was at this moment that it became
necessary for one like me to present an alternative which had
proved its effectiveness under somewhat similar circumstances.
* My appeal to the Czechs was, in my opinion, as appropriate as it
would have been inappropriate in the case of the great powers.
My critics might have, however, well asked why I had gone
out of my self-prescribed orbit to speak to a Western nation
when I could not show cent per cent success of non-violence on
the Indian soil — ^more especially now, when I had begun to
'entertain serious doubts as to whether Congressmen were really
living up to their creed or policy of non-violence. Indeed I had
in mind the limitation and the present state of uncertainty about
the Congress position. But my own faith in the non-violent re-
medy was as bright as ever when I wrote that article. And 1 felt
that in the supreme hour of its trial it would be cowardly on
my part not to suggest to the Czechs the non-violent remedy for
acceptance. What may ultimately prove impossible of accept-
,ance by crores of people, undisciplined, and unused till but re-
cently to corporate suffering, might be possible for a small, com-
pact, disciplined nation inured to corporate suffering. I had no
Tight to arrogate to myself any behef that India alone and no
other nation was fit for non-violent action. I mustn;confess that
I have believed and still believe that India was the fittest nation
to enforce non-violent action for regaining her freedom. In spite
of signs to the contrary, I have the hope that the whole mass of
people, who are more than the Congress/ will respond only to
non-violent action. They are the readiest of all the nations of
the earth for such action. But when a case for immediate appli-
cation of the remedy presented itself before me, I could not
restrain' myself from suggesting it to the Czechs for their accept-
ance.
It is, however, open to the great powers to take it up any
day and cover themselves with glory and earn the eternal grati-
tude of posterity. If they or any of them can shed the fear of
destruction, if they disarm themselves, they will automatically
help the rest to regain their sanity. But then these great pow^s
have to give up imperialistic ambitions and exploitation of t e
THE JEWS
159
so-called uncivilized or semi-civilized nations of the earth and
Tevise their mode of life. It means a complete revolution. Great
nations can hardly be expected 'in the ordinary course to move
spontaneously in a direction the reverse of the one they have
followed and, according to their notion of value, from victory to
victoiy. But miracles have happened before and may happen
«ven in this very prosaic age. Who can dare limit God’s power
of undoing wrong ? One thing is certain. If the mad race for
armaments continues, it is bound to result in a slaughter such
-as has never occurred in history. If there is a victor left, the
very victory will be a living death for the nation that emerges
victorious. There is no escape from the impending idoom save
through a bold and unconditional acceptance of the non-violent
method with aU its glorious implications. Democracy and vio-
lence can ill go together. The States that are today nominally
democratic have either to become frankly totalitarian or, if they
are to become truly democratic, they must become courageously
non-wolent. It is a blasphemy to say that non-violence can only
Tje practised by individuals and never by nations which are com-
posed of individuals.
Peshawar, 5-11-38
Harijan, 12-11-1938
64
THE JEWS
Several letters' have been received by me asking me to de-
clare my views about the Arab-Jew question in Palestine and
the persecution of the Jews in Germany. It is not without hesi-
tation that I venture to offer my views on this very difficult
■question.
My sympathies are all with the Jews. I have known them
intimately in South Africa. Some of them became lifelong com-
panions. Through these friends I came to learn much of their
age-long persecution. They have been the untouchables of
Christianity. The parallel between their treatment by Chri-
stians and the treatment of tmtouchables by Hindus is very close.
160
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE ANB WAR
k *
Religious sanction has been invoked in both cases for the justifi-
cation of the inhuman treatment meted out to them. Apart from
the friendships, therefore, there is the more common universal
reason for -my sympathy for, the Jews.
But my sympathy does not blind me to the requirements of
justice. The cry for the national home for the Jews does not
mal^e much appeal to me. The sanction for it is sought in the
Bible and the tenacity with which the Jews have hankered after
return to Palestine. Why should they not, like other peoples of
the earth, make that country their home where they are bom
and where they earn their livelihood ?
\
Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that
England belongs to the English or France to the French. It is
wrong and inhuman to impose the Jews on the Arabs. What is
going on in Palestine today cannot be justified by any moral
code of conduct. The mandates have no sanction but that of the
last war. Surely it would be a crime against humanity to reduce
the proud Arabs so that Palestine can be restored to the Jews
partly or wholly as their national home.
The nobler course would be to insist on a just treatment of
the Jews wherever they are bom and bred. The Jews bom in
France are French in precisely the same sense that Christians
bom in France are French. If the Jews have no home but
Palestine, will they relish the idea of being forced to leave the
other parts of the world in which they are settled? Or do they
want a double home where they can remain at will ? This cry
for the national home affords a colourable justification for the
German expulsion of the Jews.
But the German persecution of the Jews seems to have no
parallel in history. The tyrants of old never went so mad as
Hitler seems to have gone. And he is doing it vdth religious
zeal. For, he is propounding a new religion of exclusive and
militant nationalism in the name of which any inhumanity be-
comes an act of humanity to be rewarded here and hereafter.
The crime of an obviously mad but intrepid youth is being wsited
upon his whole race with unbelievable ferocity. If there ever
could be a justifiable war in the name of and for humanity, a
war against Germany, to prevent the wanton persecution of a
THE JEWS
161
whole race, would be completely justified. But I do not believe
in any war. A discussion of the pros and cons of such a war is,
therefore, outside my horizon or province.
But if there can be no war against Germany, even for such a
crime as is being committed against the Jews, surely there can
be no alliance with Germany. How can there be alliance bet-
ween a nation which claims to stand for justice and democracy
and one which is the declared enemy of both? Or is England
drifting towards armed dictatorship and all it means ?
Germany is showing to the world how efficiently violence
can be worked when it is not hampered by any hypocrisy or
weakness masquerading as humanitarianism. It is also showing
how hideous, terrible and terrifying it looks in its nakedness.
Can the Jews resist this organized and shameless persecu-
tion ? Is there a way to ^preserve their self-respect, and not to
feel helpless, neglected and forlorn ? I submit there is. No
person who has faith in a living God need feel helpless or for-
lorn. Jehovah of the Jews is a God more personal than the
God of the Christians, the Mussalmans or the Hindus, though as
a matter of fact, in essence, He is common to all and one without
a second and beyond description. But as the Jews attribute
personality to God and believe that He rules every action of
theirs, they ought not to feel helpless. If I were a Jew and
were born in Germany and earned my livelihood there, I would
claim Germany as my home even as the tallest gentile German
might, and challenge him to shoot me or cast me in the dungeon ;
I would refuse to be expelled or to submit to discriminating
treatment. And for doing this I should not wait for the fellow
Jews to join me in civil resistance, but would have confidence
that in the end the rest were bound to follow my example. If
one Jew or all the Jews were to accept the prescription here
offered, he or they cannot be worse off than now. And suffering
voluntarily undergone will bring them an inner strength and
joy which no number of resolutions of sympathy passed in the
world outside Germany can. Indeed, even if Britain, France and
America were to declare hostilities against Germany, they can
bring no inner joy, no inner strength. The calculated violence
of Hitler may even result in a general massacre of the Jews by
way of his first answer to the declaration of such hokilities.
11
162
NON-*VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
But if the Jewish mind could be prepared for voluntary suffer-
ing, even the massacre I have imagined could be turned into a
day of thahksgiwng and joy that Jehovah had ivrought deliver-
ance of the race even at the hands of the tyrant. For to the
God-fearing, death has no terror. It is a joj’ful sleep to be
follov/ed by a waking that would be all the more refreshing for
the long sleep.
It is hardly necessary for me to point out that it is easier
for the Jews than for the Czechs to follow my prescription. And
they have in the Indian satyagraha campaign in South Africa
an exact parallel. There the Indians occupied precisely the
-same place that the Jews occupy in Germany. The persecution
diad also a religious tinge. President Kruger used to say that
ihe White Christians were the chosen of God and Indians were
inferior beings created to serve the Whites. A fundamental
clause in the Transvaal constitution was that there should be no
equality between the Whites and coloured races including
Asiatics. There too the Indians were consigned to ghettos des-
cribed as locations. The other disabilities were almost of the
same type as those of the Jews in Germany. The Indians, a
mere handful, resorted to satyagraha without any backing
from the world outside or the Indian Government. Indeed the
British ofiScials tried to dissuade the satyagrahis from their con-
templated step. World opinion and the Indian Government
came to their aid after eight years of fighting. And that too was
by way of diplomatic pressure, not of a threat of war.
But the Jews of Germany can offer satyagraha under in-
finitely better auspices than the Indians of South Africa. Tlie-
Jews are a compact, homogeneous community in Germany.
They are far more gifted than the Indians of South Africa. And
they have organized world opinion behind them. I am con-
vinced that, if someone with courage and vision can arise among
them to lead them in non-violent action; the winter of their
despair can in the twinkling of an eye be turned into the
summer of hope. And what has today become a degrading
man-hunt cm be turned into a calm and determined stand
offered by unarmed men and women possessing the strength of
suffering given to them by Jehovah. It will be then a truly reli-
gious resistance offered against the godless fury of dehumanized
THE JEWS
163
man. The German Jews will score a lasting victory over the
German gentiles in the sense that they will have converted the
latter to an appreciation of human dignity. They will have
rendered service to feUow-Germans and proved their title to be
the real Germans as against those who are today dragging, how-
ever unknowingly, the German name into the mire.
, And now a word to the Jews in Palestine. I have no doubt
that they are going about in the wrong way. The Palestine of
the Biblical conception is not a geographical tract. It is in their
hearts. But if they must look to the Palestine of geography as
their national home, it is wrong to enter it tmder the shadow
<of the British gim. A religious act cannot be performed with
the aid of the bayonet or the bomb. They can settle in Palestine
•only by the goodwill of ^e Arabs. They should seek to convert
the Arab heart. The same God rules the Arab heart who rules
the Jewish heart. They can offer satyagraha in front of the
•Arabs and offer themselves to be shot or thrown into the Dead
"Sea without raising a little finger against them. They will find
the world opinion in their favour in their religious aspiration.
’There are himdreds of ways of reasoning with the Arabs, if
they will only discard the help of the British bayonet. As it is,
they are co-sharers with the British in despoiling a people v/ho
.have done no wrong to them.
I am not defending the Arab excesses. I wish they had
-chosen the way of non-\iolence in resisting what they rightly
regarded as an unwarrantable encroachment upon their coun-
try. But according to the accepted canons of right and wrong,
nothing can be said against the Arab resistance in the face
•of overwhelming odds.
Let the Jews who claim to be the chosen race prove their
title by choosing the way of non-violence for vindicating their
position on earth. Every coimtry is their home including
Palestine not by aggression but by loving service. A Jewish
friend has sent me a book called The Jewish Contribution to
‘Civilization by Cecil Roth. It gives a record of what the Jews
have done to enrich the world’s literature, art, music, drama,
-science, medicine, agricultmre, etc. Given the will, the Jew can
refuse to be treated as the outcaste of the West to be despised
'OT patronized. He can command the attention and respect of the
164
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
•world by being man, the chosen creation of God, instead of being
man who is fast sinking to the brute and forsaken by God.
They can add to their many contributions the surpassing contri-
bution of non-'violent action,
Harijan, 26 - 11-1938
65
HOW TO FIGHT NATIONAL GANGSTERISM ?
Dr. Mott began the next day with these prefatory remarks :
“You put in your quite original way your -views on the ques-
tions I asked. I value it more than I can say. I was impressed
by your recognition that there was a certain amount of -advance
in thought but not in action. It is a great thing that so many
leading minds have begim to think about these -vital questions
in an advanced way. I could show you, too, that there are cer-
tain things actually concretely on foot. But, today, I want to
engage your attention on another matter. What to do -with
‘ gangster ’ nations, if I may use the expression frequently used ?
There was indi-vidual gangsterism in America. It has been put
dovm by strong poHce measures both local and national. Could
not we do something similar for gangsterism between nations,
as instanced in Manchuria — the nefarious use of the opium
poison, in Abyssinia, in Spain, in the sudden seizure of Austria,
and then the case of Czechoslovakia ? Now in this connection
let me say I was deeply impressed by what you wrote on the
Czechoslovakian crisis and on the Jewish question. Can we
bring something like international police into being ?”
Gandhiji : This question is not new to me.
Dr. Mott : I judge not.
Gandhiji : I have to deal with identical questions with
reference to conditions in India. We have had to quell riots,
communal and labour. The ministries have used militar5’ force
in some cases and police in most. Now whilst I agreed that the
ministers could not help doing so, I also said that the Congress
ministers had proved themselves bankrupt with their stock-in-
REPLY TO GERMAN CRITICS
165
trade, I mean their avowed weapon of non-violence. Even
.-so, I wotdd say in reply to the question you have asked, viz.
that if the best minds of the world have not imbibed the spirit
of non-violence, they would have to meet gangsterism in the
•orthodox way. But that would only show that we have not got
far beyond the law of the jungle, that we have not yet learnt
to appreciate the heritage that God has given us, that in spite of
the teaching of Christianity which is 1900 years old and of
Hinduism and Buddhism which are older, and even of Islam
(if I have read it aright), we have not made much headway as
human beings. But whilst I would understand the use of force
by those who have not the spirit of non-violence in them, T
would have those who know non-violence to throw their whole
weight in demonstrating that even gangsterism has to be met by
non-violence. For, ultimately, force, however justifiably used,
will lead us into the* same morass as the force of Hitler and
Mussolini. There will be just a difference of degree. You and
T who believe in non-violence must use it at the critical moment,
We may not despair of touching the hearts even of gangsters,
'even if, for the moment, we may seem- to be striking our heads
against a blind wall.
Harijan, 10-12-1938 M. D.
66
REPLY TO GERMAN CRITICS
I was not unprepared for the exhibition of wrath from Ger-
many over my article about the German treatment of the Jews.
1 have myself admitted my ignorance of European politics. But
In order to commend my prescription to the Jews for the re-
moval of their many ills, I did not need to have an accurate
knowledge of European politics. The main facts about the
atrocities are beyond dispute. When the anger over my writing
has subsided and comparative calmness has returned, the most
wrathful German will find that xmderlying my writing there was ^
friendliness towards Germany, never any ill-will.
1G6
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
Have I not repeatedly said that active non-violence is un-
adulterated love — fellow-feeling? And if the Jews, instead of
being helplessly and of necessity non-violent, adopt active non-
violence, i.e. fellow-feeling, for the gentile Germans deli-
berately, they cannot do any harm to the Germans ; and I am as
certain as I am dictating these lines that the stoniest German
heart will melt. Great as have been the Jewish contributions
to the world’s progress, this supreme act of theirs will be their
greatest contribution and war will be a thing of the past.
It passes comprehension why any German should be angry
over niy utterly irmocuous writing. Of course German critics^
as others, might have ridiculed it by saying that it was a
visionary’s effort doomed to fail. I therefore welcome this
wrath, though wholly unmerited, against fny writing. Has my
writing gone home ? Has the writer felt that my remedy was
after all not so ludicrous as it may appear, but that it was emi-
nently practical if only the beauty of suffering without reta-
liation was realized ?
To say that my writing has rendered neither myself, my
movement, nor German-Indian relations any service, is surely
irrelevant, if not also imworthy, implying as it does a threat;
and I should rank myself a coward if, for fear of my country or
myseff or Indo-German relations being harmed, I hesitated to
give what I felt in the innermost recesses of my heart to be cent
per cent sound advice.
The Berlin writer has smrely emmciated a novel doctrine
that people outside Germany may not criticize German action
even from friendliest motives. For my part I would certainly
welcome the interesting things that Germans or other outsiders
may unearth about Indians. I do not need to speak for the Bri-
tish. But i£ I know the British people at all, they too welcome
outside criticism when it is well-informed and free from malice.
In this age, when distances have been obliterated, no nation can
afford to imitate the fabled frog in the well. Sometimes it is
refreshing to see ourselves as others see us. If, therefore, the
German critics happen to see this reply, I hope that they will
SOME QUESTIONS ANSWERED
107
not only revise their opinion about my writing but will also
realize the value of outside criticism.
Sevagram, 8-12-38
Harijan, 17-12-1938
67
SOME QUESTIONS ANSWERED
Friends have sent me two newspaper cuttings criticizing my
appeal to the Jews. The two critics suggest that in presenting
non-violence to the Jews as a remedy against the wrong done
to them I have suggested nothing new, and that they have been
practising non-violence for the past two thousand years.
Obviously, so far as these critics are concerned, I did not make
my meaning clear. The Jews, so far as I know, have never prac-
tised non-violence as an article of faith or even as a deliberate
policy. Indeed, it is a stigma against them that their ancestors
crucified Jesus. Are they not supposed to believe in eye for an
eye and tooth for a tooth ? Have they no violence in their hearts
for their oppressors ? Do they not want the so-called demo-
cratic powers to punish Germany for her persecution and to
deliver them from oppression ? If they do, there is no non-
violence in their hearts. Their non-violence, if it may be so
called, is of the helpless and the weak. .
What I have pleaded for is remmciation of violence of the
heart and consequent active exercise of the force generated by
the great renunciation. One of the critics says that favourable
public opinion is necessary for the working of non-violence. The
writer is evidently* thinking of passive resistance conceived as
a weapon of the weak. I have drawn a distinction between
passive resistance of the weak and active non-violent resistance
of the strong. .The latter can and does work in the teeth of the
fiercest onposition. But it ends in evoking the widest public sym-
pathy. Suiierings of the non-violent have been known to melt
the stoniest hearts. I make bold to say that, if the Jews can
summon to their aid the soul power that comes only from
168
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAB
non-violence, Herr Hitler will bow before the courage which he
has never yet experienced in any large measure in his dealings
with men, and which, when it is exhibited, he will own, is infi-
nitely superior to that shown by his best storm troopers. The
exhibition of such courage is only possible for those who have a
living faith in the God of Truth and Non-violence, i.e. Love.
Of course the critics can reasonably argue that the non-
violence pictured by me is not possible for masses of mankind,
it is possible only for the very few highly developed persons. I
have combated that view and suggested that, given proper train-
ing and proper generalship, non-\nolence can be practised by
masses of mankind.
I see, however, that my remarks are being misunderstood to
mean that, because I advise non-\dolent resistance by the perse-
cuted Jews, by inference I expect or would advise non-inter-
ference by the democratic powers on behalf of the Jews. I
hardly need to answer this fear. Surely there is no danger of
the great powers refraining from action because of anything I
have said. They will, they are boimd to, do all they can to free
the Jews from the inhuman persecution. My appeal has force
in the face of the fact that the great powers feel unable to
help the Jews in an effective manner. Therefore it is that I
have offered the prescription which I know to be infallible when
taken in the right manner.
The most relevant criticism, however, which I have received
is this: How do I expect the Jews to accept my prescription
when I know that India, where I am myself working, where I
call myself the self-appointed Gteneral, has not accepted it
in toto ? My answer is, ‘ Blessed are they that expect nothing.'
r belong to the category of the blessed, in this case at least.
Having got the prescription and being sure of its efficacy, I felt
that I would be wrong if I did not draw attention to it when I
saw cases where it could be effectively applied.
Hitherto I have refused to deal with European politics. My
general position still remains the same. I presented mv remedy
almost in suppressed tones in the case of Abyssinia. The cases
of the Czechs and the Jews became more vivid to me than the
case of the Abyssinians. And I could not restrain myself from
writing. Perhaps Dr, Mott was right when he said to me the
NON-VIOLENCE AND WORLD CRISIS
169
other day that I must write more and more articles like those
•on the Czechs and the Jews, if only because they must aid me
in the Indian struggle. He said that the West was never more
prepared than now to listen to the message of non-violence.
Sevagram, 9-12-38
Harijan, 17-12-1938
68
NON-VIOLENCE AND WORLD CRISIS
Distinguished Guests
The International Missionary Conference that opened at
Tambaram near Madras recently brought a stream of distin-
guished visitors into our midst. Several of them met Gandhiji
Ly appointment in his village retreat at Sevagram to have an
•exchange of views with him on the eve of the Conference.
Among them were Rev. William Paton, Secretary of the Inter-
national Missionary Council, Rev. Leslie B. Moss, Secretary of
the Conference of Missionary Societies in North America and an
influential Church leader, and Dr. E. Smith of the British and
Eoreign Bible Society in London, who, besides his mission work,
is an authority on anthropology, and Dr. John Mott, described
by Rev. J. Z. Hodge as “ the noblest Roman of them all ”, whose
talk with Gandhiji has already been detailed in these columns
hy M. D.
Their Concern
The concern that filled them was, “How can humanity be
■saved from the impending international crisis that threatens to
plunge it into an orgy of hate and ■violence ? ” Never, perhaps,
has “civilization” been exposed to such a naked challenge of
brute force or experienced in dealing ■with it, as Dr. Mott put it,
■such a “ humiliation of impotence ” as today. Not that humanity
has not before known the phenomenon, of the resurge of bar-
'barism. The tornado of •violence that overswept the earth in the
wake of Tamerlane or AtiUa and his Huns was not unlike what
threatens the world today. But then the nations of the Wesfr
170
NON-VIOIiENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
had not yet known the “ weapon of the spirit ” which later on
was discovered to meet the menace. The tragedy today is that^
although these nations received the message of Jesus 2,000 years
ago, they never enforced it on anything like a universal scale,
and therefore today find themselves bankrupt in the face of the
impending doom. And so^ men of light and leading among them
feel the urge to seek a reinterpretation of that teaching in the
light of present-day problems and how effectively to apply it to
them.
India’s non-violence movement has thus by sheer contrast
come to acquire a world significance. Gandhiji’s visitor friends
were, therefore, naturally anxious to study and understand the
inner springs of his non-violence and put him searching ques-
tions regarding the nature and meaning of his faith, and prayer
and fasting and silence, and non-violent resistance as inculcated
b^^ him in its application to the problem of international anarchy
and “gangsterism amongst nations”. And finally they sought
his advice as to how missionaiy effort, which they represented,
could be co-ordinated with India’s non-violence movement for
the achievement of the common goal.
Leaving out the last question, which was exhaustively dealt
with in the course of the talk, already reported, with Dr. Mott,
I shall try to sum up here Gandhiji’s answers to various ques-
tions that were discussed with him by the visitors, and supple-
ment his remarks, where necessary, to further elucidate his
standpoint, by his utterances since. ^
The Question of Motive
Going to the very rock-bottom, one of the questioners asked
Gandhiji what his motive in life was, “ the thing that leads us
to do what we do”, whether it was religious, or social or
political.
“Purely religious,” replied Gandhiji. “This was the ques-
tion asked me by the late Mr. Montagu when I accompanied a
deputation which was purely political. ‘How have you, a social
reformer,’ he exclaimed, ‘found your way into this crowd ?’ My
reply was that it was only an extension of my social activity. I
could not be leading a religious life unless I identified myself
NON-VIOLENCE AND WORLD CRISIS
171
with the whole of mankind, and that I could not do unless I took
part in politics. The whole gamut of man’s activities today
constitutes an indivisible whole. You cannot divide social, eco-
noihic, political and purely religious work into watertight com-
partments. I do not know any religion apart from human acti-
vity. It provides a moral basis to all other activities which thejr
would otherwise lack, reducing life to a maze of ‘sound and
fury signifying nothing’.”
Seeing the influence you wield over the people,” he was
next asked, “ may we inquire whether it is the love of the cause
or the love of the people that moves you ?”
“ Love of the people,” was Gandhiji’s unhesitating reply.
“ Cause without the people is a dead thing. Love of the people*
brought the problem of untouchability early into my life. My^
mother said, ‘ You must not touch this boy, he is an untouchable.^’
^ Why not ?’ I questioned back, and from that day my revolt
began.”
No Exclusion of Politics
“You would expect us Christians to copy your example.
Should we allow our " religious motive to plimge us into*
politics ?”
“ Those who come from different parts of the world into this
country cannot say,” replied Gandhiji, “ ‘ we shall have nothing*
to do with the politics of the country.’ They would not be true
to their faith, if they bargained with the government in order
to supersede their fellow-feeling* with the people. Supposing*
the government does a grievous wrong to the people of the soil
and the missionaries are told that they must not lift a finger to
prevent it, surely, the least they can do is to leave the country
by way of signifying their displeasure at the perpetration of the*
wrong,' If a missionary puts himself out for service, opportu-
nities will come — today it may be in the economic sphere,
tomorrow in the social, next time it may be in the political field.
You cannot then say, ‘ I shall confine myself to this or that work:
and do nothing else.’ When I went to South Africa I knew
nothing about that country. I was boimd to my client only.
Yet, within seven days of my reaching there, I found that I had*
to deal with a situation too terrible for words.”
172
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
Non-violence the Supreme Law
Gandhiji was next asked in what relation his non-violence
stood to the pacifist attitude, ‘‘ which we Westerners are trying to
adopt without much success/’ It seemed strange to find ministers
of rehgion asking Gandhiji, a layman, to explain as to whether
and how moral force could make its impact against the
materialist world.
‘‘In my opinion,” replied Gandhiji, “non-violence is not.
passivity in any shape or form. Non-violence, as I imderstand
it, is the activest force in the world. Therefore, whether it is
materialism or anything else, if non-violence does not provide
an effective antidote, it is not the active force of my conception.
Or, to put it conversely, if you bring me some conundrums that
I cannot answer, I would say my non-violence is still defective.
Non-violence is the supreme law. During my half, a century
of experience I have not yet come across a situation when I
had to say that I was helpless, that I had no remedy in terms of
non-violence.
The Jews and Non-violence
“Take the question of the Jews on which I have witten.
No Jew need feel helpless, if he takes to the non-violent way. A
friend has written me a letter objecting that in that article I
Iiave assumed that the Jews have been violent. It is true that
the Jews have not been actively violent in their own persons.
But they called down upon the Germans the curses of mankind,
and they wanted America and England to fight Germany on
their behalf. If I hit my adversary, that is of course viplence,
but to be truly non-violent I must love him and pray for him
even when he hits me. The Jews have not been actively non-
violent, or in spite of the misdeeds of the dictators they would
say, ‘ We shall suffer at their hand ; they knew no better. But
we shall suffer not in the manner in which they want us to
suffer.’ If even one Jew acted thus, he would save his self-
respect and leave an example which, if it became infectious,
would have the whole of Jewry and leave a rich heritage to
-mankind besides.
China’s Ordeal
“What about China, you will ask. The Chinese have no
•designs upon other people. They have no desire for territory*
NON-VIOLENCE AND WORLD CRISIS
175 ^
True, perhaps, China is not ready for such aggression ; perhaps,
what looks like her pacifism is only indolence. In any case
China’s is not active non-violence. Her putting up a valiant de-
fence against Japan is proof enough that China was never inten-
tionally non-violent. That she is on the defensive is no answer
in terms of non-violence. Therefore, when the time for testing
her active non-violence came, she failed in the test. This is no
criticism of China. I wish the Chinese success. According to
the accepted standards her behaviour is strictly correct. But
when the position is examined in terms of non-violence, I must
say it is unbecoming for a nation of 400 mdlions, a nation as
cultured as Japan, to repel Japanese aggression by resorting to
Japan’s own methods. If the Chinese had non-violence of my
” conception, there would be no use left for the latest machinery
for destruction which Japan possesses. The Chinese would say
to Japan, ‘ Bring all your machinery, we present half of our
population to you. But the remaining two hundred millions
won’t bend their knee to you.’ If the Chinese did that, Japan
would become China’s slave.” And in support of his argument
he referred to Shelley’s celebrated lines from The Mask of
Anarchy^ ‘‘Ye are many, they are few”:
Stand ye calm and resolute,
Like a forest close and mute,
With folded arms and looks which are
Weapons of unvanquished war.
And if then the tyrants dare,
Let them ride among you there,
Slash, and stab, and maim and hew,—
What they like, that let them do.
With folded arms and steady eyes.
And little fear, and less surprise,
Look upon them as they slay
Till their rage has died away.
Then they will return with shame
To the place from which they came,
And the blood thus shed will speak
In hot blushes on their cheek. <
Rise like Lions after slumber
In unvanquishable number —
Shake your chains to earth like dew
Which in sleep had fallen on you— ^
Ye are many — they are few.
174
NON-VIOMMCE IN PEACE AND WAR
Mechanical Warfare and Non-Violence
“ It has been objected, however,” said Gandhiji, “ that non-
violence is aU right in the case of the Jews because there is per-
sonal contact between the individual and his persecutors, but in
•China Japan comes with its long-range guns and aeroplanes.
The person who rains death from above has never any chance
of even kno-wing who and how many he has killed. How can
non-violence combat aerial warfare, seeing that there are no
personal contacts ? The reply to this is that behind the death-
-dealing bomb there is the human hand that releases it, and behind
that still is the hiunan heart that sets the hand in motion. And
at the back of the policy of terrorism is the assumption that
terrorism if applied in a sufficient measure ' ■will produce the
desired result, namely, bend the adversary to the tyrant’s will.
But supposing a people make up their mind that they •will
never do the tyrant’s "will, nor retaliate with the tyrant’s own
methods, the tyrant wiU not find it worth his while to go on with
his terroism. If sufficient food is given to the tyrant, a time •will
come when he will have had more than surfeit. If all the mice
in the world held conference together and resolved that they
would no more fear the cat but all run into her mouth, the mice
would live. I have actually seen a cat play •with a mouse. She
did not kill it outright but held it between her jaws, then
released it, and again pounced upon it as soon as it made an
•effort to escape. In the end the mouse died out of sheer fright.
The cat would have derived no sport, if the mouse had not tried
to run away. I learnt the lesson of non-violence from my wife,
when I tried to bend her to my will. Her determined resistance
to my -will on the one hand, and her quiet submission to the
suffering my stupidity involved on the other, ultimately made
me ashamed of myself, and cured me of my stupidity in think-
ing that I was bom to rule over her, and in the end she became
my teacher in non-'violence. And what I did in South Africa
was but an extension of the rule of satyagralia which she un-
willingly practised in her o'wn person.”
Wliat about Dictatorships ?
But one of the -visitors objected : “ You do not know Hitler
and Mussolini. They are incapable of any kind of moral res-
ponse. They have no conscience, and they have made themselves
NOx, -VIOLENCE AND WORLD CRISIS
175
impervious to world opinion. Would it not be playing
into 'the hands of these dictators if, for instance, the Czechs,
following your advice, confronted them with non-violence ?
Seeing that dictatorships are unmoral by definition, would the
law of moral conversion hold good in their case ?”
“Your argument,” rephed Gandhiji, “presupposes that the
■dictators like Mussolini or Hitler are beyond redemption. But
belief in non-violence is based on the assumption that hiun^
nature in its essence is one and therefore unfailingly respon s
to the advances of love. It should be remembered that they have
up to now always found ready response to the violence that they
have used. Within their experience, they have not come across
organized non-violent resistance on an appreciable e, i a
-all. Therefore it is not only highly likely, but I hold it to
inevitable, that they would recognize the superiority of non-
violent resistance over any display of violence that ey may
-capable of 'putting forth. Moreover the non-violent ^chmqu
“that I have presented to the Czechs does not
success on the goodwill of the dictators, for, a non-wo en
depends upon the unfailing assistance of God w c sus ams
•throughout difficulties which would othervnse be consid
insurmountable. His faith makes him indomitab e.
The visitor retorted that these dictators wisely refrain om
using force, but simply take possession of what ^ '
the circumstances what can non-violent resisters o .
• “ Suppose,” replied Gandhiji, “ they come and occupy ^es,
factories and all sources of natural wealth be onging
Czechs, then the following results can take place : (1)
Czechs may be annihilated 'for disobedience to ot ^
would be a glorious victory for the Czechs and t e
of the of Germany. (2) The Czechs might come ^
ralized in the presence of overwhelming force, ^is is a '
common in all struggles. But if demoralization dc^s ® ’
it would not be on account of non-violence, but +v,;Tif«
to absence or inadequacy of non-violence. (3) ^ ir
that can take place is'that Germany might use her
sions for occupation by her surplus population. Inis,
could not be avoided by offering violent resistance, for we
.assumed that violent resistance is out of the question.
176
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
non-violent resistance is the best method vmder all conceivable
circumstances,
“I do not think that Hitler and Mussolini are after aU so
very indifferent to the appeal of world opinion. But today
these dictators feel satisfaction in def3dng world opinion because
none of the so-called Great Powers can come to them with clean,
hands, and they have a rankling sense of injustice done to their
people by the Great Powers in the past. Only the other day an
esteemed Enghsh friend owned to me that Nazi Germany was
England’s sin, and that it was the treaty of Versailles that made
Hitler.” '
Visitor : “ What can I as a Christian do to contribute to in-
ternational peace ? How can international anarchy be broken
down and non-violence made effective for estabhshing peace ?
Subject nations apart, how can nations at the top be made to
disarm themselves ?”
Gandhiji : “ You as a Christian can make an effective con-
tribution by non-violent action even though it may cost you your
all. Peace will never come until the Great Powers courageously
decide to disarm themselves. It seems to me that recent events
must force that belief on the Great Powers. I have an implicit _
faith — a faith that today bums brighter than ever, after half a
century’s experience of imbroken practice of non-violence — that
mankind can only be saved through non-violence, which is the-
central teaching of the Bible as I have imderstood the Bible.”
Sevagram, 12-12-’38
Harijan, 24-12-1938
Pyarelal
69
A JAPANESE VISITOR
We rarely have visitors from these totalitarian States. Capt.
Stxunk (who was later killed in a duel) was the last Nazi that
visited, Sevagram two years ago. We have not yet had a live
Fascist, nor one representing militarist Japan. Mr. Takaoka,
JVIember of the Japanese Parliament, who was on a visit here
the other day, did not seem to come as one. He seemed to fear
that v/hilst the Sino-Japanese War was going on, a visit from a
Japanese was not likely to be welcome, but “ after all, the war
was not going to last for all time, and our duty is to find out
how friendship could be established between Japan and India
and China.” At any rate he did not seem to be keen on defend-
ing the war of aggression, and simply confined himself to the
question of unity between Japan and India. How could it be
possible ?
In replying to him Gandhiji said : “ It can be possible if Japan
ceases to throw its greedy eyes on India. No doubt you do not
bring your army to India, but you employ your matchless skill,
and your ability to hide the truth, and your knowledge of the
weaknesses of Indians, in order to flood India with your goods
which are often flimsy. You have copied the rulers of India in
their methods of exploitation and gone even one better. Now,
from the Japanese standpoint, you cannot afford to lose the
niillions of rupees that you get from India. And if you cannot
get them voluntarily, you will be quite capable of doing so by
force of arms. But that would not be the way of bringing
Japan and India together. ^Vhat can bring them together is a
moral bond based on mutual friendship.
“ But there is no basis for that friendship today. Take your
art. I like it. I read a fascinating account of Japan and Japa-
nese life by Edwin Arnold many years ago. That picture has
remained with me. I want to assimilate all your good points,
but unfortunately no one comes here to give us the good things
of Japan. You believe only in dumping your goods on us. How
can I take a single yard of Japanese cloth, however fine and
artistic it may be ? It is as poison to us, for it means starvation
12
177
178 ■
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
for the poor people of India. You have left the West far behind
in diplomacy, in skill, in cheap manufactures, in armed warfare,
in exploitation. How then can there be friendship between you
and us, so long as you see nothing %vrong in exploitation ?”
Mr. Takaoka wondered if Gandhiji could give a message
to the new party in Japan which stand for Asia for the Asiatics.
“ I do not subscribe to the doctrine of Asia for the Asiatics,
if it is meant as an anti-European combination,” said Gandliiji.
“ How can we kave Asia for the Asiatics unless we are content
to let Asia remain a frog in the well ? But Asia cannot afford
to remain a frog in the well. It has a message for the whole
world, if it will only live up to it. There is the imprint of
Buddhistic <influence on the whole of Asia, which includes India,
China, Japan, Burma, Ceylon and the Malaj’-a States. I said to
the Burmese and the Ceylonese that they were Buddhist in
name ; India was Buddhist in reality. I would say the same
thing to China and Japan. But, for Asia to be not for Asia but
the whole world, it has to relearn the message of Buddha and
deliver it to the world. Today it is being denied everjavhere.
In Burma every Buddhist monk is being dreaded by the Mus-
lims. But why should anyone who is a true Buddhist be dreaded
by anyone ?
“You will, therefore, see that I have no message to give
you but tins, that you must be true to your ancient heritage. The
message is 2,500 years old, but it has not yet been truly lived.
But what are 2,500 years ? They are but a speck in the cycle of
time. The full flower of non-violence, which seems to be wither-
ing away, has yet to come to full bloom.”
Sevagram, 12-12-38
Harijan, 24-12-1938
M. D.
70
IS NON-VIOLENCE INEFFECTIVE ?
In dealing with my answer to the criticism that the Jews
had been non-violent for 2,000 years, The Statesman says in the
course of an editorial :
“The whole world has heard of Pastor Niemoeller and the
sufferings of the Lutheran Church ; here many pastors and
individual Christians bore themselves bravely before Peoples
Courts, violence and threats ; without retaliation they bore
noble witness to the truth. And what change of heart is there
in Germany ? Buried in prisons and concentration camps are
today, and have been for five years, members of the Bible
Searchers’ League v/ho rejected Nazi militarism as conflicting
with Christ’s gospel of peace. And how many Germans know
of them or, if they know, do anything about it ?
“ Non-violence, whether of the weak or of the strong, seems,
except in very special conditions, rather a personal than a so-
cial gospel. A man’s salva-tion may be left to himself ; politi-
cians are concerned with causes, creeds and minorities. It is
suggested by Mr. Gandhi that Herr Hitler would bow before a
courage ‘infinitely superior to that shown by his own Storm
Troopers’. If that were so, one would have supposed that he
would have paid tribute to such men as Herr Von Ossietzky.
Courage to a Nazi, however, seems a virtue only when displayed
, by his own supporters : elsewhere it becomes ‘ the impudent
provocation of Jewish-Marxist canaille \ Mr. Gandhi has pro-^.
duced his prescription in view of the inability of the Great
Powers effectively to move in the matter, an inability we all
deplore and would see remedied. His sympathy may do much
for the comfort of the Jews, but seems likely to do less for their
enlargement. Christ is the supreme example of non-violence,
and the indignities heaped upon Him at His tortured death
proved once and for all that in a worldly and temporal sense
it can fail hopelessly.”
I do not think that the- sufferings of Pastor Niemoeller and
others have been in vain. They have preserved their self-respect
intact. They have proved that their faith was equal to anj^
suffering. That they have not proved sufficient for melting Herr
Hitler’s heart merely shows that it is made of harder material
than stone. But the hcidest metal yields to sufficient heat.
179
180
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
Even so must the hardest heart melt before sufficiency of the
heat of non-violence. And there is no limit to the capacity of
non-violence to generate heat.
Every action is a resultant of a multitude of forces even of a
contrary nature. There is no waste of energy. So we learn in
the books, on mechanics. This is equally true of human actions.
The difference is that in the one case we generally know the
forces at work, and when we do, we can mathematically foretell
the resultant. In the case of human actions, they result from a
concurrence of forces, of most of which we have no knowledge^
But our ignorance must not be made to serve the cause of dis-
belief in the power of these forces. Eather is our ignorance a
cause for greater faith. And non-violence being the mightiest
force in the world and also the most elusive in its working, it
demands the greatest exercise of faith. Even as we believe in
God in faith, so have we to believe in non-violence in faith.
Herr Hitler is but one man enjoying no more than the
average span of life. He would Be a spent force, if he had not
the backing of his people. I do not despair of his responding
to human suffering even though caused by him. But I must
refuse to believe that the Germans as a nation have no heart
or markedly less than the other nations of the earth. They will
some day or other rebel against their own adored hero, if he does
not wake up betimes. And when he or they do, we shall find
that the sufferings of the Pastor and his feUow-workers had not
a little to do with the awakening.
An armed conflict may bring disaster to German arms ; it
cannot change the German heart even as the last defeat did not.
It produced a Hitler vowed to wreak vengeance on the victors.
And what a vengeance it is ! My answer, therefore, must be
the answer that Stephenson gave to his fellow-workers v/ho had
despaired of ever filling the deep pit that made the first railway
possible. He asked his co-workers of little faith to have more
faith and go on filling the pit. It was not bottomless, it must
be filled. Even so I do not despair because Herr Hitler’s or the
German heart has not yet melted. On the contrary I plead for
more suffering and stiff more till the melting has become visible
to the naked eye. And even as the Pastor has covered himself
with glory, a single Jew bravely standing up and refusing to bow
CHINA AND JAPAN
181
•to Hitler’s decree will cover himself with glory and lead the
way to the deliverance of the fellow-Jews.
I hold that non-violence is not merely a personal virtue. It
is also a social virtue to be .cultivated like the other virtues.
.Surely society is largely regulated by the expression of non-
violence in its mutual dealings. What I ask for is an extension
•of it on a larger, national and international scale.
I was unprepared to find the view expressed by The
.Statesman writer that the example of Christ proved once and
ior all that in a worldly and temporal sense it can fail hope-
lessly ! ! Though I cannot claim to be a Christian in the secta-
rian sense, the example of Jesus’ suffering is a factor in the com-
, position of my undying faith in non-violence which rules all my
actions worldly and temporal. And I know that there are hun-
■dreds of Christians who believe likewise. Jesus lived and died
in vain, if he did not teach us to regulate the whole of life by
the eternal law of love.
On the train to Bardoli, 2-l-’39'
Harijan, 7-1-1939
• 71
CHINA AND JAPAN
But that discussion could not enthuse Gandhiji. He went
^ -straight to the question on which he wanted to hear first-hand
from Dr. Kagawa. “ Wliat is the feeling of people in Japan
.about the war ? ”
“ I am rather a heretic in Japan,” said Dr. Kagawa. “ Rather
than I express my views, I would like to learn from you what
you would do if you were in my position.”
“ It would be presumptuous for me to express my views.”
" No, I would like very much to know what you would do.”
" 1. would declare my heresies and be shot. I would put the
co-operatives and all your work in one scale, and put the honour
of your nation in the other, and if yqu found that the honour was
being sold, I should ask you to declare your views against Japan
rmd in so doing make Japan live through your death. But, for
182 NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
this, inner conviction is necessary. I do not know that I should
be able to do all that I have said if I were in your position, but
I must give you my opinion since you have asked for it.”
“ The conviction is there. But friends have been asking me
to desist.”
“Well, don’t listen to friends when the Friend inside you
says, ‘ Do this.’ And friends, however good, can sometimes well
deceive us. They cannot argue otherwise. They would ask you
to live and do your work. The same appeal was made to me
when I took the decision to go to jail. But I did not listen to
friends, with the result that I found the glow of freedom when
I was confined within the four solid walls of prison. I was inside
a dark cell, but I felt that I could see everything from within
those walls, and nothing from outside.”
Dr. Kagawa seemed to shrink from continuing this discus-
sion. There was indeed no room for it. The conviction was
there, but it could fructify only in its proper time. So he
switched on again to his theme of co-operation : “Have you
some irrigation co-operatives in India ? ” But Gandhiji was full
of other things.
“ I do not think so,”. Gandhiji replied. “ Of course you have
all these things. You have done marvellous things, and we have
many things to learn from you. But how can we understand
this swallowing alive of China, drugging her with poison, and
so many other horrid things that I read about in a book called
What War Means which Pandit Jawaharlal has given me ? How
could you have committed all these atrocities ? And then
great poet calls it a war of humanity, and a blessing to China !” p
Harijan, 21-1-1939
M.H.
72
A WORLD IN AGONY
I
China’s Travail
The last day of the dying year and the New Year’s day
brought to Sevagram a unique gathering of representatives of
various nations who had been to the Tambaram Conference.
This world in miniature,” as Gandhiji described them, included
delegates from three continents. There were Rev. S. S. Tema
of D. R. Mission, Johannesburg, Rev. Thompson D. Sankange of
Kweiide Mission, S. Rhodesia, and I/liss Mina Soga, the first
Negro woman to visit India in a representative capacity. There
'was too a Japanese delegate, M. S. Murao from Tokyo. From
China there were Rev, Timothy Tingfang Lew, member, Legis-
lative Yuan of the National Government of China, Y. T. Wu,
Editor-in-Chief of Association Press of the National Y. M. C. A.,
Shanghai, and formerly Chairman of the Fellowship of Recon-
ciliation in China. And lastly, there was P. C. Hsu, philosopher
and author of several works on Confucius, rural reconstruction,
etc. At one time professor in Shanghai University, he is at
present helping in establishing a network of ashrams in China
where the scholars set before themselves the ideal of “toil
unsevered from tranquillity ”, and themselves do all odd and
so-called menial jobs like cleaning, sweeping, etc.
Most of them, as devout Christians, had a strong leaning
towards pacifism, and the representatives of the Chinese and
the Negro races, haying felt the iron heel of oppression of the
Japanese militarism and the militarism of the White races res-
pectively, were deeply interested in the method of non-violence
as a weapon for resisting militaristic aggression. The Chinese
delegate had come fresh from the theatre of war, and had
experienced the horrors of modem warfare in all its nakedness.
They felt themselves on the horns of a dilemma. ^
Tom between their horror of a patriotic war and their just
resentment against the unwarranted invasion of their liberties,
they poured out their spiritual anguish before Gandhiji, and
183
184 NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR.
askod him, as tha apostla of non-viol6iice, to show thorn tho way
how to make non-violence effective.
Rev. Lew’s Dilemma
Rev, Lew, who saw Gandhiji separately 'on the first day, in
conveying thanks for the Indian Medical Mission to help the
Chinese, remarked :
“We appreciate it as an expression of India’s sympathy and
goodwill towards China. China’s struggle is not merely for
China but for the whole ,of Asia. It is for Japan too. The
Japanese think they are invincible because they defeated us in
1885, but we know that even now their people are paying a
heavy price for this war of aggression, in the form of high
taxation, etc.
Cultural Destruction ?
“We are not afraid of material destruction, distressing
though it is, but of cultural destruction. The first bomb in
Shanghai hit a library. Colleges have been mped out. Professors
have been killed. New education has been disorganized and
forced to migrate into the interior.
“Even worse is the moral injury they have done us,” he
continued. And he gave a lurid description of how a s 3 ^stematic
attempt is being made to force the drug evil upon China, which
they had been, for the last twenty . 3 ^ears, trying to fight tooth
and nail. “When they occupied Peking they opened 50 new
brothels there, filling them with Korean girls. The arm 3 ' of
occupation rapes women everywhere, the figure for Peking alone
being anything between 8,000 to 20,000 according to various
estimates. In Shanghai the revenue in one month from gambl-
ing and drug shops that have been opened under Japanese
authorit 3 ^ amoimted to 250 thousand dollars. The morale of
the whole nation is being sapped. There is no hope once you
are enslaved by the drug habit on a nation-wdde scale. Supposing
we 'win the war after 10 or Id nia3^ restore material
devastation, but how shall we redeem our young generation ?
^ “ We want your message. We have translated your Auto-
biography into Chinese. We look to you for spiritual guidance.”
Culture is Bomb-proof
Gandhiji replied: was once asked by a Chinese friend
from Shantiniketan to give a message to the Cliinese people. I
A WORLD IN AGONY
185
had to ask him excuse me. I gave him my reasons. If I
merely said I sympathized with the Chinese in their struggle, it
would be not of much value as coming from me. I should love
to be able to say to the Chinese definitely that their salvation lay
only through non-violent technique. But then it is not for a
person like me, who is outside the fight, to say to a people who
are engaged in a life and death struggle, * Not this way, but that.’
They would not be ready to take up the new method, and they
would be unsettled in the old. My interference would only shake
them and confuse their minds.
‘‘ But whilst I have no ‘ message ’ to send to the Chinese
people who are engaged in fighting, I have no hesitation in pre-
senting my viewpoint to you. I was almost going to ask you as
to what you meant by being culturally ruined. I should be
sorry to learn that Chinese culture resided in brick and mortar
or in huge tomes which the moth can eat. A nation’s culture
resides in the hearts and in the soul of its people. Chinese
•culture is Chinese only to the extent that it has become part and
parcel of Chinese life. Your saying, therefore, that your culture
^nd your morals are in danger of being destroyed, leads one to
think that the reform movement in your country was only
•skin-deep. Gambling had not disappeared from the people’s
hearts. It was kept down not by the tone set by society, but by
the penalty of the law. The heart continued to gamble. Japan
is of course to blame and must be blamed for what it has done
or is doing. But then Japan is just now like the wolf whose
iDUsiness it is to make short work of the sheep. Blaming the wolf
would not help the sheep much. The sheep must learn not to
iall into the clutches of the wolf.
“ If even a few of you took to non-violence, they would stand*
forth as living monuments of Chinese culture and morals. And
then, even if China were overwhelmed on the battlefield, it
would be well with China in the end, because it would at the
same time be receiving a message which contains a promise of
hope and deliverance. Japan cannot force drugs down unwilling
throats at the point of the 'bayonet. It can only set up tempta-
tions. You cannot teach* people to resist these temptations by
Toplying to Japanese force by force. Whatever else force may or
may not be able to achieve, it cannot safeguard Chinese morals
or save Chinese culture.
186
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
you feel the truth of my remarks^ you will become a
Ihong message to China. You will then tell the Chinese people,
‘No matter what material destruction Japan inflicts, it cannot
bring about China’s cultural destruction. Our people must be
sufficiently educated and warned to resist all the temptations
that Japan may devise. Monuments and cities may be razed to
the ground. They are but a passing show, that is going one day
to be claimed by time as its own. If they are destroyed the
Japanese, it will only be a morsel taken out of time’s mouth.
The Japanese cannot corrupt our soul. If the .soul of China is
injured, it will not be by Japan.’ ”
Boycott of Japan
The Chinese friend yvas of opinion that only the economic
collapse of Japan could save China. They wanted to know what
the prospects of a boycott of Japanese goods by India were.
“ I wish,” replied Gandhiji, “ I could say that there v/as any
great hope. Our sympathies are with you, but they have not
stirred us to our very depths, or else we should have bo3’’Cotted
all Japanese goods, especially Japanese cloth. Japan is not only
conquering you, but it is trying to conquer us too by its cheap,
flimsy machine-made goods. The sending of the Medical Mission
was good as a gesture of friendship and goodwill which there
are in abimdance. But that does not give me much satisfaction
when I know we could do much more. We too are a big nation
like you. If we told the Japanese, ‘ We are not going to import
a single yard of yoim calico nor export any of our cotton to 3"ou/
Japan would think twice before proceeding with its aggression.”
Non-violent Technique
This talk was followed by a discussion later with the whole
gi'oup. The Chinese delegates put searching questions.* There
was an eagerness minutely to study ” the mind and face ” of
non-\dolence. One of them asked, “ Is it not necessary' that indi-
\nduals should practise non-\nolence first in them own person,
in their relations with other individuals ? ’ And by way of
illustration he described how, even after he came to have the
conviction that non-violence was the law of life, for years he
refused to preach its use in outer affairs to others. “ I said I
would first try myself to live it and perfect myself in its practice.
I began hy making a resolve not to answer back or refute
A WORLD IN AGONY
187 '
criticism directed against me. After seven years I gave a repbrt
of my experience to my students. I cannot say that in practice
my method has always answered. So I say to myself, ‘ Patience,
I must try again.’ ”
“ It would be a delusion to think otherwise,” replied
Gandhiji. “If one does not practise non-violence in one’s
personal relations with others and hopes to use it in bigger
affairs, one is vastly mistaken. Non-violence like charity must
begin at home. But if it is necessary for the individual to be
trained in non-violence, it is even more necessary for the nation
to be trained likewise. One cannot be non-violent in one’s own
circle and violent outside it. Or else, one is not truly non-
violent even in one’s own circle ; often the non-violence is only
in appearance. It is only when you meet with resistance, as
for instance, when a thief or a murderer appears, that your non-
violence is put on its trial. You either try or should try to
oppose the thief with his own weapons, or you try to disarm him
by love. Living among decent people, your conduct may not be
described as non-violent. Mutual forbearance is not non-violence.
Immediately, therefore, you get the conviction that non-violence
I is the law of life, you have to practise it towards those who act
violently towards you ; and the law must apply to nations as
to individuals. Training is no doubt necessary. And beginnings
are always small. But if the conviction is there, the rest will
follow,”
Another question was : “ In the practice of non-violence, is
there not danger of developing a ‘ martyrdom complex ’ or pride
creeping in ? ”
Gandhiji : “ If one has that pride and egoism, there is no
non-violence. Non-violence is impossible without humility. My
own experience is that whenever I have acted non-violently I
have been led to it and sustained in it by the higher promptings
of an unseen power. Throu'gh my own will I should have miser-
ably failed. Wlien I first went to jail, I quailed at the prospect.
I had heard terrible things about jail life. But I had faith in
God’s protection. Our experience was that those who went to
jail in 'a prayerful spirit came out victorious, those who had gone
in* their own strength failed. There is no room for self-pitying
in it either, when you say God is giving you the strength.
Self-pity comes when you do a thing for which you expect re-
188
NON-VIOIxENCE IN PEACE AND ^7AB
cognition from others. But here there is no question of
recognition.^’
To Fight or Not to Fight
Another friend thus placed his dilemma : I am a firm
believer in non-violence. Eight years ago I read your
Experiments with Truth and immediately became converted to
the way of life you have there advocated Shortly after that I
translated the book into Chinese. And then came, the Japanese
invasion. My faith in non-wolence was put to a severe test and
I was caught in a dilemma. On the one hand I felt I could not
preach non-violence to my people who were never militaristic
but who now believed that resistance with force was the only
way out. It was the best thing they knew, and I believ e with
you that ‘I would rather risk the use of force a thousand times
than let my people lose their manhood.’ But on the other hand
when I try to take a sympathetic attitude and try to do some-
thing helpful in such a situation, 1 find I am giwng moral and
material support directly and indirectly to something which is^
against the highest that I know. There seems to be no way out
of this dilemma because I cannot live in a X'acuum and an\i:hing
1 do will work one way or the other. While I can believe with-
•out reserve in non-\dolence in personal relationships, even
though I faU far short of it, I cannot feel in the same way when
1 am faced wdth a national situation in which the great majoriK
of the people have not even heard of the way of non-wolence.”
The Non-violent Equivalent
“ Your’s is a difficult situation,” replied Gandhiji. Such
♦difficulties have confronted me more than once. I took part on
the British side in the Boer War forming an ambulance corps,
T did likewise at the time of what has been described as the Zulu
Eevolt. The third time was during the Great War. I believed
in non-violence then. My motive was wholly non-wolent. That
seemingly inconsistent conduct gave me strength. My example
'Cannot be used as a precedent for otliers to follov/. Lrooking back
upon my conduct on those three occasions, I have no sense of
remorse. I know this too that my non-wolent strength did not
su5er diminution because of those experiences. The actual work
I was called upon to do was purely humanitarian, especially
during the Zulu Revolt. I and my companions were privileged
A WORUD IN AGONY
189
to nurse the wounded Zulus back to life. It is reasonable ta
suggest that but for our services some of them would have diecL
I cite this experience not to justify my participation, however
indirect it was. I cite it to show that I came through that ex-
perience with greater non-violence and with richer love for the
great Zulu race. And I had an insight into what war by White,
men against coloured races meant.
‘‘ The lesson to be learnt from it by you is that, placed as
you are in a position of hopeless minority, you may not ask your
people to lay down their arms unless their hearts are changed
and by laying down their arms they feel the more courageous-
and brave. But whilst you may not try to wean people from
war, you will in your person live non-violence in all its com-
pleteness and refuse all participation in war. You will develop-
love for the Japanese in your hearts. You will examine yourseK
whether you can really love them, whether you have not some
ill-will towards them for all the harm they are doing. It is not
enough to love them by remembering their virtues. You must
be able to love them in spite of all their misdeeds. If you have
that love for the Japanese in your hearts, you will proceed to
exhibit in your "conduct that higher forai of courage which is the-
hall-mark of true non-violence and which your Chinese friends
wiU not fail to detect and recognize as such. You will not wish
•success to Japanese arms because you ‘love’ the Japanese. At
the same time you will not pray for the success of Chinese arms.
It is very difficult to judge, when both sides are employing-
weapons of violence, which side ‘ deserves ’ to succeed. You will,
therefore, pray only that the right should prevail. Whilst you
will keep yourself aloof from all violence, you will not shirk
danger. You will serve friend and foe alike with a reckless
disregard for your life. You will rush forth if there is
sn outbreak of an epidemic or a fire to be combated,
and distinguish* yourself by your surpassing courage
and non-violent heroism. But you will refuse to call
the curses of heaven upon the Japanese. If by chance some
Japanese soldiers or airmen fall into the hands of the Chinese
and are in danger of being lynched by an infuriated Chinese mob
or otherwise ill-treated, you will plead for them with your own
people and, if necessary, even protect them with your life. You-
Imow the story of Emily Hobhouse. Though an Englishwoman,
•ago* ' NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
she courageously went to the Boer concentration camps. She
exhorted the Boers never to lose heart, and it is said that, if she
had not steeled the hearts of the Boer women as she did, the war
might have taken a different turn. She was full of wrath against
her ovm people for whom she had not a good word to say. You
would not copy her unmeasured wrath which somewhat vitiated
her non-violence, but you .will copy -►her love for the -enemy’
that made her denounce the misdeeds of her own countr^TOen.
Your example will affect the Chinese, and might even shame
some Japanese who will become bearers of your message among
the Japanese,
‘‘ A very slow process, you will perhaps say. Yes, possibly,
under the existing adverse circumstances to begin with. But it
v/ill gather momentum and speed in an incalculable manner as
you proceed. I am an irrepressible optimist. My optimism
rests on my belief in the infinite possibilities of the individual
10 develop non-violence. The more you develop it in your own
being, the more infectious it becomes till it overwhelms your
surroundings and by and by might oversweep the world.”
I, a believer in non-violence, often find that I am actuated
by mixed motives. So does a war General have mixed motives.
Is it not possible to fight, with love for the enemy in one’s heart ?
May we not shoot out of love ? ”
Gandhiji : We do often have mixed motives. But that
would not' be non-violence. There can be degrees in violence,
not in non-violence. The constant effort of the votary of non-
violence is to purge himself of hatred towards the so-called
enemy. There is no such thing as shooting out of love in the
way you suggest.”
Can Non-violence Be Organized ?
The last to place before Gandhiii his problem was Mr. P. C.
Hsu. He had been writing since 1930 to meet Gandhiii. He had
graduated in the same year in wliich Japan presented her
twentyone demands to Cliina. He was at that time a bitter
nationalist. After three years of contact with the work of the
Fellowship of Reconciliation among the students, he changed
his views, and began to make a distinction between the Japa-
nese people and the Japanese military machine. He became a
•believer in an international lining up of liberal elements. ‘*1
can say honestly/’ he told Gandhiji, “ I have no feeling of hatred
A WORLD IN AGONY
191
towards the Japanese people, but I feel their military system is
an evil. I used to think that all that was needed to end it was
education in truth. I had hoped that at Tambaram, at any rate,
an international link between the two countries on the basis of
mutual goodwill and peace would be forged. But I was dis-
illusioned. I found that very little could be achieved imme-
diately.” He had tried too to establish peace groups as an
agency for carrying on the peace work, but found that confront-
ed by a crisis they were reduced to impotence and could offer
little effective check. “Our difficulty is this,” he concluded.
“While sincerely believing in non-violence, we have not found
a way of making it effective.”
“ Should that present a difficulty ? ” exclaimed Gandhiji.
“A person who realizes a particular evil of his time and finds that
it overwhelms him, dives deep in his own heart for inspiration,
and when he gets it, he presents it to others. Meetings and group
organizations are aU right. They are of some help, but very
little.' They are like the scaffol&ng that an architect erects — a
temporary and makeshift expedient. The thing that really
matters is an invincible faith that cannot be quenched.
“ Faith can be developed. Only, the way it can be developed
and in which it works differs ftom that in the' case of violence.
You cannot develop' violence through prayer. Faith,_ on the other
hand, cannot be developed except through prayer.
“ Non-'violence succeeds only when we have a li'ving faith
in God. Buddha, Jesus, Mahomed — they were 'all warriors of
^ peace in their own style. We have to enrich the heritage left
by these world teachers. God has His own wonderful way of
executing His plans and choosing His instruments. The Prophet
and Abu Bakr trapped in a cave were saved from their perse-
cutors by a spider which had woven its web across the mouth of
that cave. All the world teachers, you should know, began with
a zero ! ! ”
Gandhiji’s interlocutor seemed to be satisfied. But he had
another doubt. “ Whilst we have isolated individuals -w'ho ha-ve
the mind of Jesus,” he observed to Gandhiji, “because they are
not united, not organized, theirs remains a mere cry in the
wilderness. The question that arises in my mind is ; Can love be
organized ? and if so, how ? ”
. Gandhiji ; “ Organization in the orthodox sense may not be
192
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
possible. But there is no bar to united non-violent action. I
am trying to show by a series of experiments that it is possible.
It has its own technique.”
If China Wins
“If China wins the war,” finally asked the friend, “ will she
be worse off or better oS for her victory ? ”
“If China wins,” replied Gandhiji, “and copies Japanese
methods, she will beat Japan hollow at her own game. But the
victory of China will not mean a new hope for the world. For
China will then be a multiple edition of Japan. But w^hether
China wins or goes dov/n, your line of action is clear. If China
is defeated on the battlefield, your non-violence wall remain un-
daunted and will have done its work. If China wnns, you will
go to the gallows in the attempt to wean China from copying
Japan’s methods.”
Bardoli, 15-l-’39 PYARELAL
Harijan, 28-1-1939
73
A WORLD IN AGONY
n
A Programme for Africa
The future programme of action for the emancipation of the
Negro race in the Union of South Africa was the theme of a dis-
cussion that Rev. S. S. Tema of D. R. klission, Johannesburg, had
with Gandhiji at Wardha. Rev. Tema is himself a Negro and
a member of the African Congress. He is engaged in social work
among his people. There are ten million Negroes in South
Africa as against two million Whites and 75,000 Indians. Like
other coloured and oppressed races of the world, the Negro
population of South Africa too is developing a race conscious-
ness which has been intensified by the rape of Abyssinia by
Italy. The impact of White ci\dli 2 ation has done the Negro little
good. The Christian missionary went to him with the Bible.
But while the Sermon on the Mount has remained a dead letter
A WORLD IN AGONY
193
SO far as the conduct of the Whites towards him was concerned,
the drink habit and the disease that followed in its wake have
spread like a veldt fire among the natives’ kraals and worked
havoc there. They have realized too, after bitter experience,
the utter futility of armed resistance. The growth of conscious-
ness among them has, therefore, only led to a deepening of their
despair. “We seem to be up against a stone wa^^L We are
crushed down by a power that is pitiless and inexorable as
fate. There is nothing that can avail us. We seem doomed,” —
was the lament poured out to Gandhiji once by a Negro friend
who saw him at Sabarmati ten years ago. Since then the
success of the non-violence programme of the Congress has
brought to some of their leaders a fresh glimmer of hope, and
Rev.'Tema was anxious to learn the secret of that success.
“How can my people make their Congress as successful as the
Indian National Congress ? ” he asked Gandhiji.
“The Congress,” replied Gandliiji, “became successful for
the simple reason that it was inaugurated by the most selfless
and cultured people that could be foimd in that age. They made
themselves the representatives of the people, and captured their
imagination by reason of service and self-sacrifice. They were
from the people and of the people.” After describipg in some
detail the services and the evolution of the Congress as a demo-
cratic organization, Gandhiji proceeded ; “ You have not, as far
as I am aware, a band of Africans who would be content to work
and live in impecuniosity. Among those who are educated there
is not that absolute selflessness. Again, while most of your
leaders are Christians, the vast mass of the Bantus and Zulus
are not Christians. You have adopted European dress and
manners, and have' as a result become strangers in the midst of
your own people. Politically, that is a disadvantage. It makes
it difficult for you to reach the heart of the masses. “ You must
not be afraid of being ‘ Bantuized ’ or feel ashamed of carrying
an assagai or of going about with only a tiny clout roimd your
loins. A Zulu or a Bantu is a well-built man and need not be
ashamed of showing his body. He need not dress like you. -You
must become Africans once more.”
A Non-mite United Front ?
Of late there has been some talk of forming an Indo-African
United Non-White Front in South Africa. " What do you think
N.— in
194 > NON-VIOLENCE IN 'PEACE AND V/AR
about it ? ” asked Rev. Tema. “ It will be a mistake,” replied
Gandhiji. “ You will be pooling together not strength but weak-
ness. You will best help one another by each standing on his
own legs. The two cases are different. The Indians are a
microscopic minority. They can never be a ‘menace’ to the
White population. You, on the other hand, are the sons of the
soil who are being robbed of your inheritance. You are bound
to resist that. Yours is a far bigger issue. It ought not to be
mixed up with that of the Indians. This does not preclude the
establishment of the friendliest relations between the two races.
The Indians^can co-operate with you in a number of ways. They
can help you by always acting on the square towards you. They
may not put, themselves in opposition to your legitimate aspira-
tions, or run you down as ‘ savages ’ while exalting themselves
as ‘ cultured ’ people, in order to secure concessions for them-
selves at your expense.”
Rev. Tema : “ What sort of relations would you favour
between these two races ? ”
Gandhiji : “ The closest possible. But while I have abolished
all distinction between an African and an Indian, that does not
mean that I do not recognize the difference between them. The
different races of mankind are like different branches of a tree
— once we recognize the common parent stock from which we are
sprung, we realize the basic unity of the human family, and
there is no room left for enmities and unhealthy competition.”
Rev. Tema : “ Should we adopt violence or non-violence as
a means for our deliverance ? ”
Gandhiji : “ Certainly, non-violence under all circumstan-
ces. But you must have a living faith in it. Even when there
is impenetrable darkness surrounding you, you must not
abandon hope. A person who believes in non-violence believes
in a living God. He cannot accept defeat. Therefore, my advice
is non-violence all the time, but non-violence of the, brave, not
of the coward.”
“Your example,” continued Rev. Tema, “has shed so much
influence upon us that we are thinking whether it would not be
possible for one or two of our young men, who we are hoping
will become leaders, to come to you for training.”
It is quite a good and sound idea,” replied Gandhiji.
Rev. Tema : “ Do you think Christianity can bring salva-
tion to Africa ? ”
A WORLD IN AGONY
195
Gandhiji : “ Christianity, as it is known and practised
today, cannot bring salvation to your people. It is my conviction
that those who today call themselves Christians do not know the
true message of Jesus, I witnessed some of the horrors that
were perpetrated on the Zulus during the Zulu Rebellion.
Because one man, Bambatta, their chief, had refused to pay his
tax, the whole race was made to suffer. I was in charge of an
ambulance corps. I shall never forget the lacerated backs of
Zulus who had received stripes and were brought to us for
nursing because no White nurse was prepared to look after
them. And yet those who perpetrated all those cruelties called
themselves Christians. They were ‘educated’, better dressed
than the Zulus, but not their moral superiors.”
Rev. Tema had one more question to ask. “Whenever a
leader comes up in our midst, he flops down after a while. He
either becomes ambitious after money or succumbs to the drink
habit or some other vice and is lost to us. How shall we remedy
this ?”
“The problem is not peculiar to you,” replied Gandhiji.
“ Your leadership has proved ineffectual because it was not
sprung from the common people. If you belong to the common
people,-, live like them and think like them, they will make
common cause with you. If I were in your place, I would not
ask a single African to alter his costume and make himself
peculiar. It does not add a single inch to his moral stature.”
Gandhiji's Dream
Rev. Tema wanted to know if Gandhiji had a message to
send through him to the Indian community in South Africa.
But Gandhiji had none at that time. An opportunity presented
itself a few days later when a group of South Africa born Indian
boys came to see him at Bardoh. They had come to pursue
their medical studies in India and sought his help to gain
admission to some suitable medical college or colleges in the
country. Gandhiji had known the parents and guardians of
some of them in South Africa as his clients. These young men
also discussed with Jiim the question of the formation of a
Non-White United Front in South Africa.
“What should we. South Africa boms, do to preserve our
Indian culture in our country of adoption ? ” they next asked
196
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
Gandhiji, ' “ What other languages would you ask us to learn
besides English ?”
Gandhiji answered by first twitting them for giving the first
place to English. He advised them instead to learn Hindustani,
which should contain all words of Sanskritic as well as Persian
or Arabic, origin, that are used by the man in the street. The
Hindus dared not neglect the study' of Sanskrit, nor the Muslims
of Arabic, not only because the study of these languages was
necessary to give them access to their scriptures in the original,
but also because these two tongues contained the grandest
poetry that the world has ever produced. “ But above all,” he
concluded, “ you should jealously retain the essential simplicity
and spirituality which is the haU-mark of Indian culture.”
Their other question was whether they should carry on the
struggle for their rights in South Africa through satyagralia or
through constitutional agitation.
"If the South African Indian community. had guts in them,
I would say satyagraha, and they are bound to win. I am
hoping that some day from among Indian youths born in South
Africa a person will arise who wiU stand up for the rights of
his countrymen domiciled there, and make the vindication of
those rights his life’s mission. He will be so pure^ so cultured,
so truthful and so dignified in his bearing that he will disarm all
opposition. The Whites will then say, ‘If all Indians were like
him, we should have no objection to giving them an equal status
with us,' But he will answer, ‘ It is not enough that there is
one representative of the Indian community whom you are ready
to recognize as your equal. What I am, other countrymen of mine
too can be, if, instead of calling them names and putting them
under all sorts of disabilities, you give them a sporting chance
in the matter of educational and other facilities which are today
denied them.’ Such a one, when he appears, will not need to
be coached by me. He will assert himself by his sheer genius.”
Bardoli, 6-2-’39 Pv.\nnuu.
Harijan, 18-2-1939
74
WORKING OF NON-VIOLENCE
have been very much interested in reading the recent
numbers of Harijan and your observations on the European
crisis and the N, V7. F. Province. But there is one aspect of
the non-violence problem, which I should have discussed v;ith
you at Sevagram if there had been time, to which you seldom
or never refer. You say that non-violent non-cooperation, as
you have developed it, is the answer to the violence which is now
threatening the whole world with ruin. There is no doubt as
to the immense effect such spirit and action could produce. But
must not the hon-violent spirit of selfless love for all, enemies
and friends alike, express itself, if it is to succeed, in a liberal,
democratic and constitutional form of government ? Society
cannot exist without law and govermnent. International peace
cannot exist unless the nations ^ccept a system of constitu-
tional government which will give them unity and law, and end
anarchy among them. No doubt some day the law of God will
be 50 ‘ written on the hearts and minds ’ of men that they be-
come individually the expression of it, and will need no human,
law or government. But that is the end. The beginning of
progress towards that heavenly goal must take the form at first
of a willingness among races, religions and nations to unite
under a single constitution, through which their unity and
membership one of another is established, the laws under which
'they live are promulgated after public discussion and by some
form of majority decision, and are enforced, where it is not
voluntarily obeyed, not by war but by police force, where per-
suasion and example have not sufiiced. As between sovereign
nations the operation of a constructive non-violence spirit must
lead to some form of federation. It cannot succeed until it
has done so. The proof that it exists effectively will be the
appearance of a federal system. Thus the only real solution
for the European problem is the federation of its 25 peoples
and nations under a single democratic constitution which will
create a government which can look at and legislate for the
problems of Europe, not as a set of rival and conflicting nations
but as a single whole with autonomous parts. In the same way
the only solution of the Indian problem is the substitution of a
democratic constitution for the control of Great Britain. And
what is true for Europe and India is true, in the long run, for
the whole world and is the only final method of ending war.
Non-violent non-cooperation may be the best, perhaps the
only, method of bringing about the change of mind and heart
197
M98
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
vjhith will make acceptance of a federal democratic constitu-
tion by the nations possible. But attainment to democratic
federation is the necessary attainment whereby its success is
assured and without which it cannot succeed. It is always a
matter of interest and indeed of surprise to me that you appear
to think that non-violent non-cooperation is enough in itself,
and that you never proclaim that a democratic system of gov-
ernment unifying men, races, religions and nations is the goal
to which it must lead, though that attainment is only possible
as the result of a spiritual change of heart and cannot be reach-
ed by force or violence or chicanery.
I do not write this as a kind of indirect argument for the
Indian constitution, though it obviously has a bearing on that
problem also. The Government of India Act is clearly a very
imperfect application of the principle of democratic federation
and must necessarily evolve rapidly if it is to work. The main
argument I have always urged for it is that in present condi-
tions it represents the only constitutional compromise uniting
Provinces, States, Moslems and Hindus which can be made to
work, and that it has far more seeds of evolution within it than
is generally recognized. If your spiritual gospel informed the
people, it would rapidly and easily evolve. My object is not to
elicit any opinion from you about the constitutional problem,
but an answer to the larger question set forth in the early part
of the letter.”
Thus writes Lord Lothian. The letter was received early in
January, but .urgent matters prevented my dealing earlier \vith
the important question raised in it.
I have purposely refrained from dealing with the nature of
government in a society based deliberately on non-violence.
All society is held together hy non-violence, even as the earth
is held in her position by gravitation. But when the law of
gravitation was discovered the discovery yielded results of
which our ancestors had no knowledge. Even so when society
is deliberately constructed in accordance with the law of non-
violence, its structure will be different in material particulars
from what it is today. But I cannot say in advance what the
government based wholly on non-violence will be like.
What is happening today is disregard of the law of non-
violence and enthronement of violence as if it were an eternal
law. The democracies, therefore, that we see at work in
England, America and France are only so-called, because the}'^
are no less based on violence than Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy
or even Soviet Russia. The only difference is that the violence
WORKING OP NON-VIOLENCE
199
of the last three is much better organized than that of the three
democratic powers. Nevertheless we see today a mad race for
outdoing one another in the matter of armaments. And if, when
the clash comes, as it is bound to come one day, the democracies
win, they will do so only because they will have the backing of
their peoples who imagine that they have a voice in their own
government, whereas in the other three cases the peoples might
rebel against their own dictatorships.
Holding the view that without the recognition of non-
violence on a national scale there is no such thing as a consti-
tutional or democratic government, I devote my energy to the
propagation' of non-violence as the law of our life — individual,
social, political, national and international. I fancy that I have
seen the light, though dimly. I write cautiously, for I do not
profess to know the whole of the law. If I know the successes
of my experiments, I know also my failures. But the successes
are enough to fill me with undying hope.
I have often said that, if one takes care of the means, the
end -will take care of itself. Non-violence is the means ; the
end for every nation is complete independence. There will be
an international league only when all the nations, big or small,
composing it are fully independent. The nature of that inde-
pendence will correspond to the extent of non-violence assimi-
lated by the nations concerned. One thing is certain. In a
society based on non-violence, the smallest nation will feel as
tall as the tallest. The idea of superiority and inferiority will
be wholly obliterated.
It follows from this that the Government of India Act is
merely a makeshift and has to give way to an act coined by the
nation itself. So far as provincial autonomy is concerned, it
has been found possible to handle it somewhat. My own expe-
rience of its working is by no means happy: The Congress
governments have not that non-violent hold over the people that
I had expected they would have.
But the federal structure is inconceivable to me because it'
contemplates a partnership, however loose, among dissimilars.
How dissimilar the States are is being demonstrated in an ugli-
ness for which I was unprepared. Therefore the federal struc-
ture, as conceived by the Government of India Act, I hold to be
an litter impossibility. Thus the conclusion is irresistible that
200 .
'NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
for one like me, wedded to non-violence, constitutional or demo-
cratic government is a distant dream so long as non-violence
is not recognized as a living force, an inviolable creed, not a
mere policy. While I prate about universal non-violence, my
experiment is confined to India. If it succeeds, the world will
accept it without effort. There is, however, a big BUT. The
pause does not worry me. My faith is brightest in the midst of
impenetrable darkness.
Sevagram, 6-2-39
Harijan, 11-2-1939
75
NO APOLOGY
I have two letters fi'om Jewish friends protesting against a
remark of mine in a dialogue reported in Harijan over the
Jewish question. Here is one of the letters :
“My attention has been called to a paragraph in Harijan
of December 24th, 1938, in which you are reported to have said
that 'The Jews called down upon the Germans the cinrses of
mankind, and they wanted America and England to fight Ger-
many on their behalf/ I can hardly doubt that you have been
misreported, for there is nothing that could possibly justify
such a statement. But as the paragraph much distressed me,
I should be glad to receive from you a word of reassurance.”
I am sorry to say that I cannot give the reassurance required.
For I did make the remark put into my mouth by Shri PyarelaL
Hardly a paper comes to me from the West which -does not
describe the agony of the Jews who demand retribution by the
democratic powers for German atrocities. Nor do I see any-
thing wrong in the attitude. The Jews are not angels. My
point was that they were not non-violent in the sense meant by
me. Their non-violence had and has no love in it. It is passive.
They do not resist because they know that they cannot resist
with any degree of success. . In their place, unless there were
active non-violence in me, I should certainly call down upon
my persecutors the curses of Heaven. It is not contended by
my correspondents that the German Jews do not want the big
powers like England, America and France to prevent the
WHAT TO DO ?
201
atrocities, if need be, even by war against Germany. I happen
to have a Jewish friend living with me. He has an intellectuar
belief in non-violence. But he says he cannot pray for Hitler.
He is so full of anger over the German atrocities that he cannot
£peak of them with restraint. I do not quarrel with him over
his anger. He wants to be non-violent, but the sufferings of
fellow-Jews are too much for him to bear. What is true of him
is true of thousands of Jews who have no thought even of
' loving the enemy With them, as with millions, ‘ revenge is
sweet, to forgive is divine.’
Sevagram, 5-2-’39
Harijan, 18-2-1939
76
WHAT TO DO ?
Here is an important letter from a principal who v/ishes to
remain anonymous :
“ A troubled conscience seeks the reasoned opinion of others
to help to solve the following pressing question : Is the cariying
out of the pledge of the Peace Pledge Union (the late Dick Shep-
pard's organization for opposing war by the refusal to resort
to violence under any circumstances whatever) a right and
practicable course of action in the present conditions of our
world ? A.
On the side of ' Yea ’ there are the following arguments :
lA The world’s greatest spiritual teachers have taught and
exemplified in their own lives that an evil thing can only be
destroyed by good means, and never by evil means, and any sort
of violence (particularly that of war, even solely in so-called
self-defence) is undoubtedly an evil means, whatever may be
the motive. Violence is, therefore, always wrong,
2. The real causes of the present violence and misery can
never be removed by war. This was proved to the hilt in the
last ‘war to end war 'and the same will always be true. Vio-
lence is, therefore, unpractical.
3. Those who feel they must fight to defend liberty and
democracy (even though they would fight for no lesser cause)
are deluded. War, in modern conditions, even if it ends in
victory, means the more certain destruction of such liberties
as remain to us than even conquest by an invader might mean ;
202
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
for no modern war can be waged successfully without the com-
plete regimentation of entire peoples. It is better to die in
conscientiously resisting oppression non-violently, than to live
as a pawn in the regimented society which viust emerge from
another war, whoever may win it.
On the side of ‘Nay’ there are the following arguments:
1. Non-violent resistance can only be effective in resisting
people who are capable of being moved by moral and humani-
tarian considerations. Fascism not only is not moved by such
considerations, but openly scoffs at them as signs of weakness.
It has no scruple in wiping out all resistance, and in employing
any degree of brutality in order to do 'so. Non-violent resist-
ance, therefore, stands no chance whatever against Fascism.
Non-violent resistance is, therefore, hopelessly unpractical in
present conditions.
2. To refuse cooperation in violent resistance (i.e. to be a
C. O. in case of war or conscription) in defence of democratic
liberty is tant^ount to helping those who are destroying that
liberty. Fascist aggression has undoubtedly been encouraged
by the knowledge that the democracies contain numbers of peo-
ple who are unwilling to fight in their defence, and who would
even oppose (and thus obstruct) their own governments if war
[ breaks out or some sort of conscription is enforced. This being
so, the conscientious objector, to violent means of defence be-
comes not merely ineffective in promoting peace, but actually
helpful to those who are breaking it.
3. War may destroy liberty, but if the democracies survive,
there is at least some possibility of regaining part of it ; whereas
if the Fascists are allowed to rule the world, there is no chance
at all. Conscientious objectors by weakening the democratic
forces are helping the opposers, and thus defeating their own
object.
The solution of this question is obviously terribly pressing
for, say, a young man in any conscriptionist country today, or
even in Great Britain, menaced as she is. But is it not really
just as pressing for those in other coimtries, say South Africa,
Egypt, or Australia which may have to face the possibility of
invasion, or in an India which in the event of ‘ Complete Inde-
pendence ’ might be faced with the possibility of invasion by
Japan or by a pan-Islamic combination ?
In the face of such possibilities (say rather probabilities)
ought not even every keen conscience (whether in a young body
or in an old) to be certain exactly what is the right and prac-
tical way of .action? In some way on some (if not every) day
this is the problem that every one of us has to face for himself.
Can your readers help to clarify the issues ? Those w*ho arc
not sure of the answer they must give when the time comes
WHAT TO DO ?
203
will be made surer by thinking it out. Those who are sure of
their own answer may help others to become equally sure.”
Nothing need be said about the arguments in favour of the
Peace Pledger’s resistance. Those against resistance deserve
careful examination. The first argument, if it is valid, cuts at
the very root of the anti-war movement, which is based on the
assumption that it is possible to convert Fascists and Nazis.
They belong to the same species as the so-called democracies
or, better still, war resisters themselves. They show in their
family circles the same tenderness, affection, consideration and
generosity that war resisters are likely to show even outside
such circles. The difference is only of degree. Indeed Fascists
and Nazis are a revised edition of so-called democracies, if they
are not an answer to the latter’s misdeeds. Kirby Page in his
brochure on the toll of the late war has shown that both the
combatants were guilty of falsehoods, exaggerations and
inhumanities. The Versailles Treaty was a treaty of revenge
against Germany by the victors. The so-called democracies
have before now misappropriated other people’s lands and have
resorted to ruthless repression. What wonder if Messrs. Hitler
& Co. have reduced to a science the imscientific violence their
predecessors had developed for exploiting the so-called back-
ward races for their own material gain ? It is, therefore, a
matter of rule of three to find out the exact amount of non-
violence required to melt the harder hearts of the Fascists and
the Nazis, if it is assmned, as it is, that the so-called democracies
melt before a given amount of non-violence. Therefore, we
must eliminate from consideration the first argument, which
would be fatal if it could be proved to have any content in it.
The other two arguments are practical. The pacifists may
not do anything to weaken their own governments so as to
compel defeat. But for fear of so doing they may not miss the
only effective chance they have of demonstrating their undying
faith in the futility of all war. If their own governments go
mad and make martyrs of war resisters, they (the governments)
must suffer the consequence of the unrest of their own creation.
The democracies must respect the liberty of individual non-
violent conscience, however inconvenient it may be. From that
respect there^will spring hope for the world. This means that
they put their conscience and truth before their country’s so-
called interest. For, regard for one’s conscience, if it is really
204
non-violence’ IN PEACE AND WAR
such, has never yet injured any ^legitimate cause or interest.
Therefore, it comes to this that a pacifist 'must resist when he
feels sti:ongly that, whether so-called democracies live or die,
the lug-of-war will never end war, and that it will only ena
when at the crucial moment a body of pacifists have at any cost
testified their living faith by suffering, if need be, the extreme
penalty. I know the point for me to consider is not how to
avoid the extreme penalty, but how to behave so as to achieve
the object in \dew. Where the very disturbing but potejnt
factor of faith is part of one’s conduct, human calculations are
of no avail. A true pacifist is a true satyagrahi. The latter acts
by faith and therefore is not concerned about the result, for he
knows that it is assured when the action is true.
After all, what is the gain if the so-called democracies win ?
War certainly will not end. Democracies will have adopted all
the tactics of the Fascists and the Nazis, including conscription
and all other forcible methods to compel and exact obedience.
All that may be gained at the end of the victory is the possibility
of comparative protection of individual liberty. But that pro-
tection does not depend upon outside help. It comes from the
internal determination to protect it against the whole world.
In other words, the true democrat is he who with purely non-
Auolent means defends his liberty and therefore his countr3r’s
and ultimately that of the whole of mankind. In the coming
test pacifists have to prove their faith by resolutely refusing to
do anything with war whether of defence or offence. But the
duty of resistance accrues only to those who believe in non-
violence as a creed — not to those who will calculate and will
examine the merits of each case -and decide whether to approve
of or oppose a particular war. It follows that such resistance
a matter for each person to decide for himself and under the
guidance of the inner voice, if he recognizes its existence.
Rajkot, 9-4-39
Harijan, 15-4-1939
77
THE JEWISH QUESTION
The Managing Editor of Jewish Frontier, published at 275,
Seventh Avenue, New York City, was good enough to send me
a copy of the March number of the magazine with the request
that I should deal with its reply to my article on the Jews in
Germany and Palestine, The reply is very ably written, I wish
I had space for reproducing the whole of it. The reader will,
however, find the main argument reproduced'" in this issue of
Harijan.
Lot me say that I did not write the article as a critic, I
wrote it at the pressing request of Jewish friends and corres-
pondents, As I decided to write, I could not do so in any other
manner.
But I did not entertain the hope when I wrote it that the
Jews would be at once converted to my view, I should have
been satisfied if even one Jew had been fully convinced and
converted.
Nor did I write the article only for today, I flatter myself
with the belief that some of my writings will survive me, and
will be of service to the causes for which they have been
written, I have no sense of disappointment that my writing
had not to my knowledge converted a single Jew,
Having read the reply more than once I must say that I see
no reason to change the opinion I expressed in my article. It is
highly probable that, as the writer says, ‘ a Jewish Gandhi in
Germany, should one arise, could function for about five
minutes and would be promptly taken to the guillotine,’ But
that will not disprove my case or shake my belief in the efficacy
of ahimsa. I can conceive the necessity of the immolation of
hundreds, if not thousands, to appease the hunger of dictators
who have no belief in ahimsa. Indeed the maxim is that ahimsa
is the most efficacious in front of the greatest himsa. Its quality
is really tested only in such cases. Sufferers need not see the
result during their lifetime. They must have faith that, if their
♦ Appendix 5 In this book.
205
206
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
cult survives, the result is a certainty. The method of violence
gives no greater guarantee than that of non-violence. It gives
infinitely less. For the faith of the votary of ahimsa is lacking.
The writer contends that I approached the Jewish problem
“ without that fundamental earnestness and passionate search for
truth which are so characteristic of his usual treatment of prob-
lems ”. All I can say is that to my knowledge there was lack
neither of 'earnestness nor of passion for truth when I wrote the
article. The second charge of the writer is more serious. He
thinks that my zeal for Hindu-Muslim imity made me partial
to the Arab presentation of the case, especially as that side was
naturally emphasized in India. I have often said that I would
not sell truth for the sake of India’s deliverance. Much less
would I do so for winning Muslim friendship. The writer thinks
that I am wrong on the Jewish question as I was wrong on the
Kliilafat question. Even at this distance of time I have no regret
whatsoever for having taken up the Khilafat cause. I know
that my persistence does not prove the correctness of my atti-
tude, Only it is necessary for everyone concerned to know
where I stand today ab^ut my action in l919-’20,
I am painfully conscious of the fact that this writing of
mine will give no satisfaction either to the Editor of Jewish
Frontier or to my many Jewish friends. Nevertheless I wish
with all my heart that somehow or other the persecution of the
Jews in Germany will end, and that the question in- Palestine
, will be settled to the satisfaction -of all the parties concerned.
Rajkot, 22-5-’39
Harijan, 27-5-1939
' 78
WITHDRAWN
In Harijan of December 24th there is a long report of my
talk with missionary friends from Tambaram on non-violence
and the world crisis."' When during the talk I took the illustra-
tion of the Jews, I am reported to have said : “ It is true that
the Jews have not been actively violent in their own jiersons.
But they called down upon the Germans the curses of mankind
and they wanted America and England to fight Germany on
their behalf.”
On reading the last sentence a dear friend wrote to me a
fiery letter and challenged me to produce my authority for my
remark. He said that I had been hasty in making the statement.
I did not realize the importance of the rebuke. I did,
however, want to produce support for my statement. I
put Pyarelal and later Mahadev on the search. It is not always
an easy task to find support for impressions one carries when
speaking or writing. Meanwhile I received a letter from Lord
Samuel supporting the contradiction of the friend referred to
above. Whilst I was having the search made, I got the following
letter from Sir Philip Hartog :
** May I take .the opportunity of saying that I agree with
what my friends Mr. Polak and Lord Samuel tell me they have
written to you about the attitude of the German Jewish refugees,
of whom I have myself seen hundreds since 1933 ? I have never
heard one of them express publicly or privately the desire for
a war of vengeance against Germany. Indeed such a war would
^ bring further misery to the hundreds of thousands of Jews still
" in Germany as well as untold suffering to millions of other
innocent men and women.”
I put greater diligence in my search. The searchers were
not able to lay hands on any conclusive writing. The manager
of Harijan put himself in correspondence with the Editor of
The Jewish Trihuney Bombay, who sent the following character-
istic reply :
''This is not the first time that I have come across the im-
putation made against Jews that they urge countries ^lii^©
* Sec chapter G8 (p. ICO) in this book.
207
208
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAH
England and America to go to war against Germany on account
of its persecutions of Jews. Jews have never urged the demo-
cracies to wage war against Germany on account of its perse-
cution of the Jews. This is a mischievous lie that must be
nailed to the counter. If there is a war, Jews will suffer more
than the rest of the population. This is a fact gleaned from
the pages of history. And the Jew is a great lover and advocate
of' peace. I hope you will refute any such allegation that is
made against them.”
In the face of the foregoing weighty contradictions now
enforced by the Editor of The Jewish Triihtpe, and of the fact
that I cannot lay my hands on anything ' on the strength of
which I made the challenged observation, I must withdraw it
without any reservation. I only hope that my observation has
not harmed any single Jew. I know that I incurred the wrath of
many German friends for what I said in all good faith.
Rajkot, 22-5^-39
Harijan^ 27-5-1939
79
THE OXFORD GROUP & MORAL REARMAMENT
The Oxford Group Movement
During recent years plenty of literature has been sent to us
pertaining to the Oxford Group Movement and its work, and we
have met not a few members of the Group, I had the advan-
tage of being invited to a number of what they call their
house-parties ” in England, and had the prhdlege of meeting
a good few members in Abbottabad.
We have found them refreshingly frank, and the friend who
met Gandhiji in Abbottabad made a few confessions that did
credit to him. On some of the basic principles we found our-
selves in complete agreement.
Moral Rearmament
The difficulty would seem to be greater when we think of
the programme of moral rearmament ivith which the Oxford
Movement has identified itself. .Dr. Prank Buchman, the
THE OXFORD GROUP & MORAL REARMAMENT
209
founder of the movement, initiated this Moral Rearmament
movement, and President Roosevelt advocated, before four
thousand persons assembled in Constitution Hall in America^
moral rearmarrient as a means of maintaining world peace. “ A
programme of moral rearmament for the world cannot fail to
lessen the dangers of armed conflict. Such moral rearmament
must receive support on a world-wide basis,” said he. And we
are told twentythree members of the House of Lords supported
the appeal declaring that “men and nations must be spiritually
equipped with faith and love ”,
Now what is one to make of this movement ? Gandhi ji was
invited to put his signature to a “ response ” to President
Roosevelt’s message. Two of the paragraphs in it read thus :
“MRA means first of all a change of heart. It means ad-
mission of our responsibility for the past, a frank acceptance
by nations as by individuals of the standards of honesty, purity,
unselfishness and love, and daily listening and daily obedience
to God’s direction.
At this fateful hour we pledge ourselves to give the last
full measure of our devotion — the service of heart, mind, will
— to the Moral and Spiritual Rearmament of our nation — to
building the world of tomorrow, the world of new men, new
nations, where every resource of human genius is liberated
under God’s leadership to enrich the heritage of all mankind. ”
With all deference to those in India who had signed this
response” Gandhiji said he could not in all conscience sign this.
He could not endorse a falsehood. How can India accept res-
ponsibility for the past ? “ All this,” said Gandhiji, “ has no
application to me.- The whole paragraph applies to exploiting
nations, whereas India is an exploited nation. The second para-
graph too applies to nations of the West and not to us. The
ivhole appeal is so unreal. I can think of moral rearmament,
but that would be in a different setting. I can think of com-
munal unity through moral rearmament. As a member of an
exploited nation* I can have a different moral rearmament pro-
gramme and I may invite China to it, but how can I invite the
West or Japan ? And just as it would be unreal for me to invite
the West, it would to that extent be unreal for the West to invite
India. Let them shed their exploitation policy and their immoral
gains first”-
N.— 14
210
in ON-VIOLENCS m PZACE AND WAP.
Gandhiji has been invited to a Moral Kearmament camp in
Kashmir, and the in^dtation is signed by an L C. S., a brigadier,
and a judge. I wonder u they have thought of the aspect pre-
sented here by GandhijL How can anyone work for peace who
has not dissociated himself hrom the Empire and all it means ?
As hlr. Charles Eoden Buxton has said : “ The British Empire,
in its present exclusive iorm, with its imperial preference ^stem
— and vrith all the envies, suspicions, and criticisms which it
causes throughout the world — is one of the greatest obstacles
lo world peace
Sevagram, 7-8-39 hi D.
Harijun, 12-8-1939
80
THE WAE RESOLUTION
On the war resolution I had a conclusive defeat. I was
imdted to draft a resolution, and so was Pandit Jawaharlal
Nehru. I was proud of n 23 ’’ draft, but my pride went before
destruction- I saw that I could not carry my resolution unless
I argued and pressed for itf But I had no such desire. Vre then
listened to Jawaharlal’s. And I at once admitted that it repre-
sented more trui 3 ’' than mine the coxmtr 3 '’s opinion and even
the Working Committee's as a whole, kline was based upon out-
and-out non-wolence. If the Congress heartily believed in non-
violence in its fullness even as a pohc^'^, this was its testing time.
But Congressmen, barring individual exceptions, do not belie\a
in such non-violence. Those who do, believe that it is the right
thing only for a fight against the Goveniment for 'ivresting
power, but the Congress has no non-violent message for the
world. I vmuld fain believ^e that the Congress had such a mes-
sage. The conclusion to both the resolutions need not have been
radicaHj" different. But the motive power being different, the
same conclusion would bear a different meaning in a dlEerent
setting. In the face of the violence going on in India itself and
in the face of the fact that Congress Governments have been
obliged to fall back upon militarv^ and police assistance, a
THE WAR RESOLUrrON
211
declaration to the world of non-violence would have seemed a
mockery. It would have carried no weight in India or with the
world. Yet, to be true to myself, I could not draft any resolution
other than I did.
The fate, to which I was party, of my resolution proved the
wisdom of my withdrawal of official connection with the Con-
gress. I attend the "Working Committee meetings not to identify
myself with its resolutions or even its general policy. I attend
in the pursuit of my mission of non-violence. So long as they
want my attendance I go there to emphasize non-violence in their
acts and through them in those of Congressmen. We pursue the
same goal. They aU of them would go the whole length with
me if they could, but they want to be true to theniselves and to
the country which they represent for the time being, even as I
want to be true to myself. I know that the progress of non-
violence is seemingly a terribly slow progress. But experience
has taught me that it is the surest way to the common goal.
There is deliverance neither for India nor for the world through
clash of arms. Violence, even for vindication of justice, is
almost 'played out. With that belief I am content to plough a
lonely furrow, if it is to be my lot that I have no co-sharer in
the out-and-out belief in non-violence.
Sevagram, 23-8-’39
Harijan, 26-8-1939
81
THE IMPENDING CRISIS
A sister from London wired on the 24th inst. : Please act.
World awaiting lead’’ Another wire from another sister in
London received today says : “ Urge you consider immediate
expression of your unshakable faith in reason not force to rulers
and all peoples.” I have been hesitating to say anything on the
impending world crisis which affects the welfare not of a few
nations but of the whole of mankind. I have felt that my word
can have no effect on those on whom depends the decision
whether there is to be war or peace. I know that many in the
West believe that my word does carry weight. I wish I shared
their belief. Not having such belief I have been praying in
secret that God may spare us the calamity of war. But I have
no hesitation in redeclaring my faith in reason, which is another
word for non-violence, rather than the arbitrament of war for
the settlement of disputes or redress of wrongs. I cannot
emphasize my belief more forcibly than by saying that I per-
sonally would not purchase my own country’s freedom by vio-
lence even if such a thing were a possibility. My faith in the
wise saying that what is gained by the sword will also be lost
by the sword is imperishable. How I wish Herr Hitler would
respond to the appeal of the President of the United States and
allow his claim to be investigated by arbitrators in whose choice
he will have as effective a voice as the disputants!
Sevagram, 28-8-’39
Harijan, 2-9-1939
82
THE SIMLA VISIT
At Delhi, as I was entraining for Kalka, a big crowd sang
1n perfect good humour, to the worn-out refrain of “ Mahatma
Gandhi ki jai”, “We do not want any understanding”. I had
then my weekly silence. Therefore I merely smiled. And those
who were standing on the footboard returned the smile with
their smile, whilst they were admonishing me not to have any
understanding with the Viceroy. I had also a letter from a
Congress committee giving me similar warning. Neither of
these counsellors knew me. I did not need the warning to know
my limitations. Apart from the Delhi demonstration and a Con-
'gress committee’s warning, it is my duty to tell the public what
happened at the interview with H. E. the Viceroy.
^ I knew that I had no authority to speak for any person
except myself. I had no instructions whatsoever from the
Working Committee in the matter. I had answered a telegra-
phic invitation and taken the first train I could catch. And
what is more, with my irrepressible and out-and-out non-
violence, I knew that I could not represent the national mind
and I should cut a sorry figure if I tried to do so. I told His '
Excellency as much. Therefore there" could be no question of
any understanding or negotiation with me. Nor, I saw, had he
sent for me to negotiate. I have returned from the Viceregal
Lodge empty-handed and without any understanding, open or
secret. If there is to be any, it would be between the Congress
and the Government.
Having, therefore, made my position vis-a-vis the Congress
■quite clear, I told His Excellency that my own sympathies were
■with England and France from the purely humanitarian stand-
point. I told him that I Cj3uld not contemplate without being
stirred to the very depth the destruction of London which had
hitherto been regarded as impregnable. And as I was -picturing
before him the Houses of Parliament and the Westminster Abbey
and their possible destruction, I broke down. I have become
•disconsolate. In the secret of my heart I am in peiqjetual
quarrel with God that He should allow such things to go on.
218
214 \ NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
My non-violence seems almost impotent. But the answer comes
at the end of the daily quarrel that neither God nor non-
violence is impotent. Impotence is in men. I must try on with-
out losing faith even though I may break in the attempt.
And so, as though in anticipation of the agony that was
awaiting me, I sent on the 23rd Jtily from Abbottabad the
following letter to Herr Hitler :
“Friends have been urging me to vrrite to you for the sake
of hiunanity. But I have resisted their request because of the
feeling that any letter from me would be an impertinence.
Something tells me that I must not calculate, and that I must
make my appeal for whatever it may be worth.
It is quite clear that you are today the one person in the
’ world who can prevent a war which may reduce humanity to
the savage state. Must you pay that price for an object, how-
ever worthy it may appear to you to be ? Will you listen to the
appeal of one who has deliberately shunned the method of war
not without considerable success ?
Any way I anticipate your forgiveness, if I have erred in
writing to you.”
How I wish that even now he would listen to reason and the
appeal from almost the whole of thinking mankind, not exclud-
ing the German people themselves! I must refuse to believe that
the Germans contemplate with equanimity the evacuation of big
cities like London for fear of destruction to be wrought by man’s
inhuman ingenuity. They cannot contemplate with equanimity
such destruction of themselves and their owm monuments. I am
not, therefore, just now thinking of India’s deliverance. It will
come, but what wall it be worth if England and France fall, or if
they come out victorious over Germany ruined and humbled ?
Yet it almost seems as if Herr Hitler knows no God but
brute force and, as Mr. Chamberlain says, he will listen io ,
nothing else. It is in the midst of this catastrophe without
parallel that Congressmen and all other responsible Indians
individually and collectively have to decide what part India is
to play in this terrible drama.
Simla, 5-9-39
Harijdn, 9-9-1939
83
SOURCE OF MY SYMPATHY
The statement made by me just after my interview with
H. E. the Viceroy has had a mixed reception. It has been des-
cribed as sentimental twaddle by one critic and as a statesman-
like pronouncement 'by another. There are variations between
the two extremes. I suppose all the critics are right from their
own standpoint, and all are wrong from the absolute standpoint
which, in this instance, is that of the author. He wrote for
nobody’s satisfaction but his own. I abide by every w’ord I have
said in it. It has no political value except what every humani-
tarian opinion may possess. Interrelation of ideas cannot be
prevented.
I have a spirited protest from a correspondent. It calls for
a reply. I do not reproduce the letter, as parts of it I do not
understand myself. But there is no difficulty in catching its
drift. ' The main argument is this :
**If you shed tears over the possible destruction of the Engr
lish Houses of Parliament and Westminster Abbey, have you no
tears for the possible destruction of the monuments of Ger-
many? And why do you sympathize with England and Prance
and not with Germany ? Is not Hitler an answer to the ravish-
ing of Germany by the Allied Powers during the last war ? If
you were a German, had the resourcefulness of Hitler, and^were
a believer in the doctrine of retaliation as the whole world is,
you would have done what Hitler is doing. Nazism may be bad.
We do not know what it really is. The literature we get is
one-sided. But I suggest to you that there is no difference bet-
ween Chamberlain and Hitler. In Hitler’s place Chamberlain
would not have acted otherwise. You have done an injustice
to Hitler by comparing him with Chamberlain, to the former’s
disadvantage. Is England’s record in India any better than
Hitler’s in another part of the world in similar circumstances?
Hitler is but an infant pupil of the old impeiialist England and
France. I fancy that your emotion at the Viceregal Lodge had
the better of your judgment.”
No one perhaps has described English misdeeds more
forcibly, subject to truth, than I have. No one has resisted
England more effectively, perhaps, than I have. And my desire
for and power of resistance remained unabated. But there arc
215
f
216
NON-VIOI^NCB m PEACE AND WAR
seasons for speech and action, as there are seasons for silence
and inaction.
In the dictionary of satyagraha there is no enemy. But as
I have no desire to prepare a new dictionary for satyagrahiSf
I use the old words giving them a new meaning, A satyagrahi
loves his so-called enemy even as his friend. He owns no
enemy. As a satyagrahi, i.e. votary of ahirtisa, I must wish well
to England, My wishes regarding Germany were, and they still
are, irrelevant for the moment. But I have said in a few words
in my statement that I would not care to erect the freedom of
my country on the remains of despoiled Germany. I should
be as much moved by a contemplation of the possible destruc-
tion of Germany’s monuments. Herr Hitler stands in no need
of my sympathy. In assessing the present merits, the past mis-
deeds of England and the good deeds of Germany are irrelevant.
Rightly or wrongly, and irrespective of what the other powers
have done before under similar circumstances, I have come to
the conclusion that Herr Hitler is responsible for the war. I
do not judge his claim. It is highly probable that his right to
incorporate Danzig in Germany is* beyond question, if the
Danzig Germans desire to give up their independent status.
It may be that his claim to appropriate the Polish Corri- •
dor is a just claim. My complaint is that he will not let the
claim be examined by an independent tribunal. It is no answer
to the rejection -of the appeal for submission to arbitration that
it came from interested quarters. Even a thief may conceivably
make a correct appeal to his fellow-thief. I think I am right in
saying that the whole world was anxious that Herr Hitler should
allow his demand to be examined by an impartial tribunaL If
he succeeds in his design, his success will be no proof of the just-
ness of his claim. It will be proof that the law of the jungle is
still a great force in human affairs. It will be one more proof
that though we humans have changed the form we have not
changed the manners of the beast.
I hope it is now clear to my critics that my s>TOpathy for
England and France is not a result of momentary emotion or, in
cruder language, of hysteria. It is derived from the never-dry-
ing fountain of non-violence which my, breast has nursed for
fifty years. I claim no infallibility for my judgment. All I
claim is that my sympathy for England and France is reasoned.
TO THE BRAVE POLES
217
I invite those who accept the premises on which my sympathy
is based to join me. What shape it should take is another matter.
Alone I can but pray. And so I told His Excellency that my
sympathy had no concrete value in the face of the concrete des-
truction that is facing those who are directly engaged in the war.
Sevagram, ll-9-’39
Harijan, 16-9-1939
84
TO THE BRAVE POLES
Gandhiji received the following cable from Morges (Swit-
zerland) from Paderewski, the aged ex-President of the Polish
Republic and celebrated pianist :
“On behalf of a nation who is today defending the sacred
right to remain free against a cruel and nameless tyranny, I
.appeal to you as one of the greatest moral authorities of the
world to use your noble influence with your countrjnnen to gain
lor Poland their sympathy and friendship. Throughout the
thousand years of its history the Polish nation has always stood
lor the highest ideals of humanity, for faith, for justice, and
peace. In this terrible hour when innumerable innocent women
and children are massacred daily, a word of sympathy and en-
couragement from you, great teacher of your own nation, would
profoundly move the heart of every Pole.”
To this Gandhiji replied :
“ Of course my whole heart is with the Poles in the unequal
struggle in which they are engaged for the sake of saving their
freedom. But I am painfully conscious of the fact that my word
carries no power with it. I wish I had the power to stop this
mad destruction that is going on in Europe. I belong to a coun-
try that has lost its independence and is struggling to be free
from the yoke of the greatest imperialist power on earth. It
has adopted the unique method of non-violence to regain its lost
freedom. Though the method has proved its efScacy to an ex-
tent, the goal seems far off. All that I can, therefore, send to
the brave Poles is my heart-felt prayer for the early termina-
218
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
tion of their fearful trial and for the grant of the required
strength to bear the suffering whose very contemplation -makes
one shudder. Their cause is just and their victory certain, "For
God is always the upholder of justice,’’
Sevagram, 8-9-39
Harijan, 16-9-1939
85
WORKING COMMITTEE’S MANIFESTO
1. The Working Committee have given their earnest con-
sideration to the grave crisis that has developed owing to the
declaration of war in Europe. The principles which should guide
the nation in the event of war have been repeatedly laid down
by the Congress, and only a month ago this Committee reiterated
them and expressed their displeasure at the flouting of Indian
opinion by the British Government in India. As a first step
to dissociate themselves from this policy of the British- Govern-
ment, the Committee called upon the Congress members of the
Central Legislative Assembly to refrain from attending the next
session. Since then the British Government have declared India
as a belligerent country, promulgated ordinances, passed the
Government of India Act Amending BiU, and taken other far-
reaching measures which affect the Indian people vitally, and
circumscribe and limit the powers and the activities of the Pro-
vincial Governments. This has been done without the consent
of the Indian people whose declared wishes in such matters have
been deliberately ignored by the British Government. The
Working Committee must take the gravest view of these deve-
lopments.
2. --The Congress has repeatedly declared its entire disap-
proval of the ideology and practice of Fascism and Nazism and
their glorification of war and violence and the suppression of
the human spirit. It has condemned the aggression in which they
have repeatedly indulged and their sweeping away well estab-
lished principles and recognized standards of civilized behaviour.
It has been in Fascism and Nazism the intensification of the
principle of imperialism against which the Indian people have
WORKING COMMITTEE’S MANIFESTO
219 -
struggled for many years. The Working Committee must there-
fore unhesitatingly condemn the latest aggression of the Nazi
Government in Germany against Poland and sympathize with
those who resist it.
3. The Congress has further laid down that the issue of
war and peace for India must be decided by the Indian people^
and no outside authority can impose this decision upon them^
nor can the Indian people permit their resources to be exploited
for imperialist ends. Any imposed decision, or attempt to use
Indian resources for purposes not approved by them, will neces-
sarily have to be opposed by them. If co-operation is desired
in a worthy cause, this cannot be obtained by compulsion and
imposition, and the Committee cannot agree to the carrying out
by the Indian people of orders issued b^^ external authority. Co-
operation must be between equals by mutual consent for a cause
which both consider to be worthy. The people of India have,
in the recent past, faced great risks and willingly made great
sacrifices to secure their own freedom and establish a free demo-
cratic State in India, and their sjmipathy is entirely on the side
of democracy and freedom. But India cannot associate herself
in a war said to be for democratic freedom when that very
freedom is denied to her, and such limited freedom as she
possesses taken away from her.
4. The Committee are aware that the governments of Great
Britain and France have declared that they are fighting for
democracy and freedom and to put an end to aggression. But
the history of the recent past is full of examples showing the*"
constant divergence between the spoken word, the ideals pro-
claimed, and the real motives and objectives. During the War
of 1914-18 the declared war aims were the preservation of demo-
cracy, seK-determination, and the freedom of small natioris^ and
yet the very governments which solemnly proclaimed these airriis
entered into secret treaties embodyng imperialist designs for
the carving up of the Ottoman Empire. While stating that they
did not want any acquisition of territory, the victorious Powers
added largely to their colonial domains. The present European
war itself signifies the abject failure of the Treaty of Versailles
and of its makers, who broke their pledged word and imposed
an imperialist peace on the defeated nations. The one hopeful
outcome of that treaty, the League of Nations, was muzzled and
^20 >
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
strangled at the outset and later killed by its parent States.
5. Subsequent history has demonstrated afresh how even
a seemingly fervent declaration of faith may be followed by an
ignoble desertion. In Manchuria the British Government con-
nived at aggression ; in Abyssinia they acquiesced in it. In
Czecho-Slovakia and Spain democracy was in peril and it was
deliberately betrayed, and the whole system of collective security
was sabotaged by the very Powers who had previously declared
Iheir firm faith in it.
6. Again it is asserted that democracy is in danger and
must be defended, and with this staterpent the Committee are
in entire agreement. The Committee believe that the peoples
of the West are moved by this ideal and objective and for these
they are prepared to make sacrifices. But again and again the
ideals and sentiments of the people and of those who have sacri-
ficed themselves in the struggle have been ignored and faith has
not been kept with them.
7. If the war is to defend the status quo, imperialist pos-
-sessions, colonies, vested interests and privileges, then India can
have nothing to do with it. If, however, the issue is democracy
»and a world order based on democracy, then India is intensely
interested in it. The Committed are convinced that the interests
of Indian democracy do not conflict with the interests of British
democracy or of world democracy. But there is an inherent
and ineradicable conflict between democracy for India or else-
where and imperialism and Fascism. If Great Britain fights for
the maintenance and extension of democracy, then she must
necessarily end imperialism in her own possessions, establish
full democracy in India, and the Indian people must have the
right' of self-determination by framing their own constitution
through a Constituent Assembly without external interference,
and must guide their own policy. A free democratic India will
gladly associate herself with other free nations for mutual
•defence against aggression and for economic co-operation. She
will work for tKe establishment of a real world order based on
freedom and democracy, utilizing the World’s knowledge and
resources for the progress and advancement of humanity.
8. The crisis that* has overtaken Europe is not of Europe
'Only but of humanity and will not pass like other crisis or wars
WORKING COMMl'i'i'KE’S MANIFESTO
221 .
leaving the essential structure of the present-day world mtact.
It is likely to refashion the world for good or iU, politically,
socially and economicaUy. This, crisis is the inevitable conse-
quence of the social and political conflicts and cdhtradictions
which have grown alarmingly since the last Great War, and it
will not be finally resolved till these conflicts and contradictions
are removed and a new equilibrium established. That eqmli-
brium can only be based on the ending of the domination and"
exploitation of one country by another, and on a reorgamzaUon
of economic relations on a juster basis for the common goo o
all. India is the crux of the problem, for India has been the
outstanding example of modem imperialism, and no refashioning
of the world can succeed which ignores this vitaLproblem. With
her vast resources she must play an important part in any scheme
of world reorganization. But she can only do so as a free nation
whose energies have been released to work .for this great en
Freedom today is indivisible and every attempt to retain impe-
rialist domination in any part of the world will lead mevitably
9. The Working Committee have noted that many rulers
of Indian States have offered their services and resources ^an
expressed their desire to support the cause of democracy in
Europe. If they must make their professions in favour of demo-
cracy abroad, the Committee would suggest that their tes
concern should be the introduction of democracy wit m eir
own States in which today undiluted autocracy rei^s
The British Government in India is more responsi ®
autocracy than even the rulers themselves, as has ^ een
painfully evident during the past year. This po icy is e ^
negation of democracy and of the new world or er or w
Great Britain claims to be fighting in Europe.
10. As the Working Committee view past events in Europe,
Africa and Asia, and more particularly past and presen
rences in India, they fail to find any attempt to .
cause of democracy or self-determination, or any evi ence
the present war declarations of the British Govemmen
being, or are going to be, acted upon. The true measur
democracy is the ending of Imperialism and F^cism a e
the aggression that has accompanied them ^ ^ ^ Tn
present. Only on that basis can a new order be b up.
522
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND V7AR
the struggle for that new world order, the Committee are eager
and desirous to help in every way. But the Committee cannot
associate themselves or offer any co-operation in a war which
is conducted on imperialist lines and which is meant to consoli-
•date imperilism in India and elsewhere.
11. In view, however, of the gravity of the occasion and
the fact that the pace of events during the last few days has
•often been swifter than the working of men’s minds, the Com-
mittee desire to take no final decision at this stage, so’ as to
allow for the full elucidation of the issues at stake, ^he real
objectives aimed at, and the position of India in the present
and in the future. But the decision Ccinnot long be delayed, as
India is being committed from day to day to a policy to which
ahe is not a party and of which she disapproves.
12. The Working Committee therefore invite the British
•Government to declare in imequivocal terms what their Avar
alms are in regard to democracy and imperialism and the new
order that is enAdsaged, in particular, how these aims are going
to apply to India and to be given effect to in the present. Do
they include the elimination of imperialism and the treatment
of India as a free nation whose policy will be guided in accord-
ance with the Avishes of her people? A clear declaration about
the future, pledging the Government to the ending of Imperialism
and Fascism alike, will be welcomed by the people of all coun-
tries, but it is far more important to give immediate effect to
it, to the largest possible extent, for only this Avill convince the
people that the declaration is meant to be honoured. The real
test of any declaration is its application in the present, for it
is the present that will govern action today and give shape to
the future.
13. War has broken out in Europe and the prospect is terri-
ble to contemplate. But war has been taking its heavy toll of
human life during the past year in Abyssinia, Spain and China.
Innumerable innocent men, women and children have been
bombed to death from the air in open cities; cold-blooded mas-
sacres, torture and utmost humiliation have followed each other
in quick 'succession during these years of horror. That horror
grows, and violence and the threat of violence shadow the world,
and, unless checked and ended, will destroy the precious inheri-
tance of past ages. That horror has to be checked in Europe
WORKING COMMITTOE’S MANIFESTO
223
and China, but it will not' end till its root causes of Fascism
and Imperialism are removed. To that end, the Working Com-
mittee are prepared to give their co-operation. But it will be
infinite tragedy if even this terrible war is carried on in the
spirit of imperialism and for the purpose of retaining this struc-
ture which is itself the cause of war and human degradation.
14. The Working Committee wish to declare that the Indian
people have no quarrel with the German people or the Japafiese
people or any other people. But they have a deep-rooted quarrel
with systems which deny freedom and are based on violence and
aggression. They do not look forward to a victory of one people
over another or to a dictated peace, but to a victory of real
democracy for all the people of all coimtries and a world freed
from the nightmare of violence and imperialist oppression.
15. The Committee earnestly appeal to the Indian people to
•end all internal conflict and controversy and, in this grave hoiu:
of peril, to keep in readiness and hold together as a imited nation,
ealm of purpose and determined to achieve the freedom of India
with the larger freedom of the world.
Wardha, 14-9-1939
Gandhiji’s Comment on the Manifesto
The Working Committee’s statement on the world crisis
took four days before it received final shape. Every member
expressed his opinion freely on the draft that was, at the Com-
mittee’s invitation, prepared by Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru. I was
sorry to find myself alone in thinking that whatever, support
was to be given to the British should be given unconditionally.
This could only be done on a purely non-violent basis. But the
Committee had a tremendous responsibility to discharge. It
•could not take the purely non-violent attitude. It felt that the
nation had not imbibed the non-violent spirit requisite for the
possession of the strength which disdains to take advantage of
the difficulty of the opponent. ' But in stating the reasons for
its conclusion the Committee desired to show the greatest con-
sideration for the English. , - • ,
The author of the statement is an artist. Though he cannot
be surpassed in his implacable oppositon to imperialism in any
shape or fo'rm, he is a friend of the English people. Indeed he
is more English than Indian in his thoughts and make-up. He
224
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE\AND y^AR r
is often more at home with Englishmen than with his own coun-,
trymen. And he is a humanitarian in the sense that he reacts^
to every wrong, no matter where perpetrated. Though, there-
fore, he is an ardent nationalist, his nationalism is enriched by
his fine internationalism. Hence the statement is a manifesto
addressed not only to his own countrymen, not only to the Bri-^
tish government and the British people, but it is addressed also
to the nations of the world including those that are exploited
like India. He has compelled India, through the Working Com-
mittee, to think not merely of her own freedom, but of the free-
dom of all the exploited nations of the world.
The same time that the Committee passed the statement it.
appointed sl Board of his choice with himself as Chairman to^
deal with the situation as it may develop from time to time.
I hope that the statement will receive the unanimous sup-
port of all the parties among Congress. The strongest among,
them will not find any lack of strength in it. And at this su-
preme hour in the history of the nation the Congress should
believe that there will be no lack of strength in action, if action
becomes necessary. It will be a pity, if Congressmen engage
in petty squabbles and party strife. If anything big or worthy
is to come out of the Committee’s action, the undivided and
unquestioned loyalty of every Congressman is absolutely neces-
sary. I hope too that all other political parties and all com-
munities will join the Committee’s demand for a clear declara-
tion of their policy from the British Government with such cor-
responding action as is possible amidst martial conditions. Re-
cognition of India, and for that matter of all -those who are
under the British Crown, as free and independent nations seems
to me to be the natural corollary of British professions about
democracy. If the war means anything less, the co-operation
of dependent nations can never be. honestly voluntary, unless
it were based on non-violence.
All that is required is a mental revolution on the part of
British statesmen. To put it still more plainly, all that is re-
quired is honest action to implement the declaration of faith in
democracy made on the eve of the war, and still being repeated
from British platforms. Will Great Britain have an unwilling-
India dragged into the war or a willing ally co-operating with
her in the prosecution of a defence of true democracy? The
A POLISH SISTER’S AGONY
225
Congress support will mean the greatest moral asset in favour
of England and France. The Congress fights not with \dolent
but with non-violent means, however imperfect, however crude
the non-violence may be.
Sevagram, 15-9-39
Harijan, 23-9-1939
86
A POLISH SISTER’S AGONY
" In spite of all I am going to try to reach Poland — sailing
tonight — to Basra in Iraq, then through Turkey and Rumania.
The inner call is irresistible. It may seem madness from the
ordinary human point of view. Now I am not going for my
mother’s sake' or for my dearest friends who are now on the
battle-fields — ready to die at any moment — it is for Poland
itself. I believe countries have also souls. Souls of nations are
a reality, not a theory, for me. If I reach the soil of Poland,
I will feel satisfied, even if I do not find those whom I love. It
is the soul (and body) of the nation itself that is in its supreme
hour of martyrdom. I believe Poland bleeds and struggles not
only for her own rights but for the Right, the Just, the True,
for the freedom of all nations, India including. I feel Hindu
to the bottom of my heart ; Indian as much as Pole, both
motherlands are to be in my soul to the last day of my life.
But I could not live if I would not do what is humanly possible
to reach the feet of the Mother who is now' bleeding in agony
of pain. I shall write from the way, but not when I reach the
war zone ; I shall only think often about you and send mental
messages tas well as I can. Bapuji, do pray in all fervour of your
great loving heart for those thousands of innocent people who
suffer incredible pain and misery in Poland. It is these that
need most sympathy and blessings and tender thoughts.”
This is the letter a Polish sister wrote from Bombay har-
bour. I have known her for some years. She has become as
much Indian as she is Polish. She had decided to work at
Maganwadi in the Magan Museum. But the rumours of war
upset her. She has an aged' mother in Poland whom she could
not bring out owing to passport difficulties. When the war
actually broke out, she calmed down so far as her mother was
concerned. But her highly strung nature would not let her rest
N. V.— 35
226
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
whilst her nearest and dearest were in peril of their lives for
^no offence of theirs. She is herself a believer through and
through in non-violence. But her very non-violence made her
restless. Her whole soul has rebelled against the wrong, as she
thinks, that is being perpetrated against her motherland. So
she has gone to find the Poland of her imagination fighting to
the last ditch, not for merely preserving her own freedom but
for the freedom of all those nations who have lost it. And in
this she naturally includes her second love, India. May her
dream prove true. If Poland has that measure of uttermost
bravery and an equal measure of selflessness, history will forget
that she defended herself with violence. Her violence will be
counted almost as non-violence. '
Sevagram, 18-9-39
Harijan, 23-9-1939
87
IS INDIA A MILITARY COUNTRY ?
In the interesting broadcast delivered by the Commander-
in-Chief of the Defence Forces in India on the 5th inst. there
occurs this passage :
“India is a military country and I am a soldier. It will,
therefore, p(flSiaps not be amiss, if I give you some personal
impressions of what the effect of modernization will be on the
personnel of the future Army in India. They are not jusfc
guess-work but based on what has already been done. With
new scientific weapons and with modern vehicles, there wiU
inevitably come new ideas and a new outlook. Modernization
is likely to give increased impetus to the already high rate of
education in the Indian Army ; and when nearly every soldier
on discharge returns to his home with a knowledge of motor
cars and machinery, there may well be a perceptible effect upon
the age-old methods of agriculture and waj’s oLliving. Moderni-
zation^ in the Army may therefore have a considerable indirect
effect upon the life of India. Many of those who hear me will
regret the passing of the horse. No one regrets it more than
myself. But as a soldier who knows the fate which awaits the
horse in modem warfare, I rejoice for its sake, that one of the
IS INDIA A MILITARY COUNTRY ?
227
greatest and best of friends of man is in future to be spared
the horrors of war,”
I must wholly, though respectfully, "dissent from the view
•that India is a military cotmtry. And I thank God that it is
not. It may be that the Commander-in-Chief has a special
meaning for the term which I do not know. Or is it that his
India is composed of only the Defence Forces under his com-
mand ? For me the Defence Forces are of the least importance
in the make-up of the nation. I need not be reminded that life
would be in constant peril if the forces were withdrawn. The
forces notwithstanding, life is not free from peril. There are
riots, there are mturders, there are dacoities, there are raids.
The Defence Forces avail little in aU these perils. They gene-
rally act after the mischief is done. But the gallant Comman-
der-in-Chief looks at things as a soldier. I and, with me, the
millions are untouched by the military spirit. From ages past
India has had a military caste in numbers wholly insignificant.
* That caste has had little to do with the millions. This, how-
ever, is not the occasion for examining its contribution to the
making of India. All I want to state, with the utmost emphasis
at my command, is that the description of India as a military
country is wrong. Of all the coimtries in the world India is the .
least military. Though I have failed with the Working Com-
mittee in persuading them, at this supreme moment, 'to declare
their tmdying faith in non-violence as the only sovereign re-
medy for saving mankind from destruction, I have not lost the
hope that the masses will refuse to bow to il^ Moloch of war
but will rely upon their capacity for suffering to save the coim-
try’s honour, - How has the undoubted military valour of Poland
' served her against the superior forces of Germany and Russia ?
Would Poland unarmed have fared worse if it had met the
challenge of these combined forpes with the resolution to face
death without retaliation ? Wordd the invading forces have
- taken a heavier toll from an infinitely more valorous Poland ?
It is highly probable that their essential nature would have
made them desist from a wholesale slaughter of innocents.
Of all the organisations of the world the Congress is the best
fitted to show it the better way, indeed the only way, to the
true life. Its non-violent experiment ■wiU have beeii in vain if,
when India wakes up from the present fear, she does not show
228
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
to the world the way of deliverance from the blood bath. The
criminal waste of life and wealth that is now going on will not
be the last, if India does not play her natural part by showing-
that human dignity is best preserved not by developing the
capacity to deal destruction but by refusing to retaliate. I have
no manner of doubt that, if it is possible to train millions in the
black art of violence which is the law of the beast, it is more
possible to train them in the white art of non-violence which
is the law of regenerate man. Anyway, if the Commander-in-
Chief will look beyond the-' Defence Forces, he will discover
that the real India is not military but peace-loving.
Nor do I contemplate without uneasiness the prospect of
Indian soldiers, trained after the modern manner, taking the
motor spirit to their homes. Speed is not the end of life. Man
sees more and lives more truly by walking to his duty.
On the train to Simla, 25-9-39
Harijarif 30-9-1939
88
CONUNDRUMS
Thus asks a well-known Congressman :
‘‘ 1. What Is your personal attitude towards this war con-
sistent with non-violence ?
2. Is it we same as, or different from, your attitude during
the last war ?
3. How could you with your non-violence actively associate
with and help the Congress whose policy is based on violence
in the present crisis ?
4. What is your concrete plan based on non-violence to
oppose or prevent this war ?”
These questions 'conclude a long friendly complaint about
my seeming inconsistencies or my inscrutability. Both are old
complaints, perfectly justified from the standpoint of the com-
plainants, wholly unjustified from my own. Therefore my com-
plainants and I must agree to differ. Only this let me say. At*
the time of writing I never think of what I have said before.
My aim is hot to be consistent wth my previous statements on
a given question, but to be consistent with truth as it may
CONUNDRUMS
229
present itself to me at a given moment. The result has been that
1 have grown from truth to truth ; I hav,e saved my memory an
undue strain ; and what is more, whenever I have been obliged
to compare my writing even of fifty years ago with the latest,
I have discovered no inconsistency between the two. But’
friends who observe inconsistency will do well to take the
meaning that my latest writing may yield unless, of course, they
prefer the old. But before making the choice they should try
to see if there is not an imderlying and abiding consistency bet-
ween the two seeming inconsistencies.
So far as my inscrutability is concerned, friends should take
my assurance that there is never any attempt on my part to
suppress my thought when it is relevant. Sometimes it arises
from my desire to be brief. And sometimes it must be due to
my own ignorance of the subject on which I may be called upon
to give an opinion.
To give a typical instance, a friend, between whom and me
there, never is any mental reservation, thus writes in anguish
rather than anger :
“In the not-improbable event of India being a theatre of
war, is Gandhiji prepared to advise his countrymen to bare
their breasts to the enemy’s sword ? A little while ago I would
have pledged my word he would do so, but I am not confident
any ^more.”
I can only assure him that, notwithstanding my recent
writings, he can retain his confidence that I would give the. same
advice as he expects I would have given before, or as I gave to
the Czechs or the Abyssinians. My non-vi6lence is made of
stern stuff. It is firmer than the firmest metal known to the
scientists.® Yet, alas, I am painfully conscious of the fact that
it has still not attained its native firmness. If it had, God would
have shown me the^way to deal with the many local cases of
violence that I helplessly witness daily. This iS said not in
arrogance but in the certain knowledge of the power of perfect
non-violence. I will not have the power of non-violence to be
underestimated in order to cover my limitations or weaknesses.
Now for a few lines in answer to the foregoing questions.
1. My personal reaction towards this war is one of greater
horror than ever before. I was not so disconsolate before as
I am today. But the greater horror would prevent me today
230 NON-VIOLENCE IN P^CE AND WAR
from becoming the self-appointed recruiting sergeant that I had
become during the last war. And yet, strange as it may appear,
my sjTupathies are wholly with the Allies. Willy niUy this war
is resolving itself into one between such democrac 3 ^ as the West
has evolved and totalitarianism as it is typified in Herr Hitler.
Though the part that Russia is plajdng is painful, let us hope
that the unnatural combination will result in a happy though
unintended fusion whose shape no one can foretell. Unless the
Allies suffer demoralization, of which there is not the slightest
indication, this war may be used to end all wars, at any rate of
the virulent type that we see today. I have the hope that India,
distraught though it is with internal dissensions, will pla}’’ an
effective part in ensuring the desired end and the spread of
cleaner democracy than hitherto. This will xmdoubtedly de-
pend upon how the Working Committee will ultimately act in
the real tragedy that is being played on the world stage. We
are both actors in and ^ectators of the drama. My line is cast.
WTiether I act as a humble guide of the Working Committee or,
if I may use the same expression without offence, -of the Gov-
ernment, my guidance will be for the deliberate purpose of
taking either or both along the path of non-violence, be the step
ever so imperceptible. It is plain that I cannot force the pace
either way. I can only use such power as Gk)d may endov/ my
head or heart with for the moment.
2. I think I have covered the second question in answer-
ing the first.
3. There are degrees of violence as of non-violence. The
Working Committee has not wilfully departed from the policy
of non-\dolence. It could not honestly accept the real implica-
tions of non-wolence. It felt that the vast mass of congressmen
had never clearl 3 ’' understood that in the event of danger from
without they were to defend the country by non-\iolent means.
All that they had learnt trul^- was that they could put up a
successful fight, on the whole non-violent, against the British
Government. Congressmen have had no training in the use of
non-violence in other fields. Thus, for example, they had not
yet discovered a sure method of dealing successful^ in a non-
violent manner with communal riots or goondaism. The argu-
ment is final inasmuch as it is based on actual experience. I
would not serve the cause of non-violence, if I deserted mj' best
I
CONUNDRUMS
231
co-workers because they could not follow me in an extended
application of non-violence.' I therefore remain \vith them in
the faith that their departure from the non-violent method will
be confined to the narrowest field and will be temporary.
4. I have no ready-made concrete plan. For me too this is
a new field. Only I have no choice as to the means. It must
always be purely non-violent, whether I am closeted with the
members of the Working Committee or with the Viceroy. There-
fore what I am doing is itself a part of the concrete plan. More
will be revealed to me from day to day, as all my plans always
have been. The famous non-co-operation resolution came to me
within less than 24 hours of the meeting of the A.I.C.C. at which
it v/as moved in Calcutta in 1920 ; and so did practically the
Dandi March. The. foundation of the first civil resistance under
the then known name of passive resistance was laid by accident
at a meeting of Indians in Johannesburg in 1906 convened for
the purpose of finding the means of combating the anti-
Asiatic measure of those days. I had gone to the meeting
with no pre-conceived resolution. It was bom at the meet-
ing; The creation is still expanding. But assuming that
God had endowed me with full powers (which He never
does), I would -at once ask the English to lay down
arms, free all their vassals, take pride in being called “little
Englanders ”, and defy all the totalitarians of the world to do
their worst. Englishmen will then die unresistingly and go
down to history as heroes of non-violence. I would further
invite Indians to co-operate with ' Englishmen in this godly
martyrdom. It will be an indissoluble partnership drawn up in
letters of the blood of their own bodies, not of their so-called
enemies. . But I have no such general power. Non-violence is a
plant of slow growth. It grows imperceptibly but surely. And
even. at the risk of being misunderstood, I must act in. obedi-
ence to “ the still small voice
On the train to Simla, 25-9-39
Harijan, 30-9-1939 ‘
89
INDIA’S ATTITUDE
On the 27th August last, i.e. just before the senseless war
broke out, Shriroati Kamaladevi Chattopadhya 3 ^a wote to me as
follows :
“ I have sent you an appeal through The Bombay Chronicle,
asking you to voice the attitude of India and of the exploited
peoples of the East on the present situation. What I meant
was not a mere reiteration of our old position that we can have
nothing to do with this imperialist war, hut something more
than that. The present conflict is mainly centred round the
usual scramble for colonies, or spheres of influence as they are
now called in polite phra^seology. On this question the world
thinks there are only two opinions, for it hears only two views :
one. which believes in the maintaining of the status quo ; the
other which wants a change but on the same basis, in other
words, a redistribution of the loot and the right to exploit, which
of course means war. It is in the very nature of things that
such a redistribution can never come about without an armed
conflict. Whether there will be anyone or anything left to
enjoy, of course, is another question. But the world is mainly
tom between these two. If the thesis of the one is accepted,
then that of the other should also be. For, if England and
Prance have the right to rule over large tracts and big nations,
then Germany and Italy have an equal right. There is as little
moral justification in the former countries crying halt to Hitler
as there is in his what he calls his- rightful claims.
That there is a third view the world hardly seems to think,
for it rarely hears it. And it is so essential that it should find
expression : the voice of the people who are mere pawns in the
game. Neither Danzig^ nor the Polish Corridor is the issue. The
issue is the principle on which the whole of this present West-
ern civilization is based : the right of the strong to rule and
exploit the weak. Therefore it is centred round the whole
colonial question, and Hitler and Mussolini are never tired of
reminding the world of that. And that is exactly the reason
why England has raised the cry of the Empire in danger. This
question, therefore, vitally concerns all of us.
We are against the status quo. We arc fighting against it
for we want a change in it. But our alternative is not war,
for we know that the real solution does not lie there. . We have
an alternative to offer which is the only solution of this horri-
ble muddle and the key to future v;orld peace. It is this which
232
IiroiA’S ATTITUDE
233
I would like to be placed before the world. It may seem today
like a cry in the wilderness ; still we know that it is the voice
which will ultimately prevail ; and it is those hands which seem
so feeble before these mailed fists that will finally reshape -n,
battered humanity.
You are eminently fitted to give voice to it. India has,
I think, a peculiar place today in the colonies of the world. It
has both a moral prestige and organizational strength enjoyed
by few colonies. The others look to it for a lead in many
matters. It has already shown to the world a superior techni-
que of struggle whose moral value the world is bound to appre-
ciate some day. India has, therefore, to tell a very distraught
and maddened world that there is another path that humanity
must tread, if it would save itself from these periodical disasters
and bring peace and harmony to a bleeding world. It is only
those who have suffered so much against this system and who
are bravely struggling to change it that can speak with all the
conviction and moral basis necessary, speak not only for them-
selves but all the exploited peoples of the world.”
I am sorry I had not seen Shrimati Kamaladevi’s letter to
The Chronicle. Try as I will, I simply cannot do adequate justice
to the reading of newspapers. The letter thTen remained on nay
file for want of time to deal with it. But I think delay has not
affected the object of her letter. Perhaps this is the psycholo-
gical moment for me to express what is or should be India’s
attitude. I agree with Kamaladevi’s analysis of the motives of
the parties to the war. Both are fighting for their existence and
for the furtherance of their policies. There is, however, this
great difference between the two : however incomplete or equi-
vocal the declarations of the Allies^are, the world has interpret-
ed them to mean that they are fighting for saving democracy.
Herr Hitler is fighting for the extension of the German boun-
daries, although he was told that he should allow his claims to
be submitted to an impartial tribunal for examination. He con-
temptuously rejected the way of peace or persuasion and chose
that of the sword. Hence my sympathy for the cause of the
Allies. But my sympathies must not be interpreted to mean
endorsement, in any shape or form, of the doctrine of the sword
for the defence even of proved right. Proved right should be
cajpable of being vindicated by right means as against the rude,
i.e. sanguinary, means. Man may and should shed his o^vn blood
for establishing what he considers to ‘be his * right’. He may
not shed the blood of his opponent who disputes his * right’.
234. NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE’ AND WAR
India as represented by the Congress has been fighting in-order
to prove her ‘ right not by the sword but by the non-violent
rdethod. And she has carved out for herself a unique place and
prestige in the world, although she is yet far — let us hope, not
very far — from the independence of ■ her dream. Her novel
method has evidently struck the imagination of the world. It
has the right to expect India to play a decisive part in this war,
which no people of the world "have wanted, by insisting that
the peace this time is not to be a mockery designed to share
among the victors the spoils of war and to humiliate the van-
quished. Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, who has a right to speak for
the Congress, has said in stately language that the peace must
mean freedom for those who are held in bondage by the
imperialist powers of the world. I have every hope that the
Congress will also be able to show the world that the power
that armaments give to defend right is nothing compared to
the power that non-violence gives to do the same thing and that
too with better show of reason. Armaments can show no reason,
they can make only a pretence of it.
Sevagram, S-10-39
Harijan, 14-10-1939
90
ON TRIAL
In the course of the conversation with the members of the
Working Committee, I discovered that their non-violence had
never gone beyond fighting the British Government with that
weapon. I had hugged the belief that congressmen had appre-
ciated the logical result of the practice of non-violence for the
past twenty years in fighting the biggest imperialist power in
the world. But in great experiments like that of non-violence,
hypothetical questions have hardly any play, I myself used to
say in answer to questions that when we had actually acquired
independence we would know whether we could defend our-
selves non-violently or not. But today the question is no longer
hypothetical. Whether there is on the part of the British Gov-
ernment a favourable declaration or not, the Congress has to
decide upon the course it would adopt in the event of an in-
vasion of India. For though there may be no settlement with
the Government, the Congress has to^^declare its policy and say
whether it would fight the invading host violently or non-
violently.
So far as I can read the Working Committee’s mind after a
fairly jfuU discussion, the members think that congressmen are
unprepared for non-violent defence against armed invasion.
This is tragic. Surely the means adopted for driving an -
enemy from one’s house must, more or less, coincide with those
to be adopted for keeping him out of the house. If anything,
the latter process must be easier. The fact, however, is that our ^
fight has not been one of non-violent resistance of the strong.
It has been one of passive resistance of the weak. There-
fore there is no spontaneous response in our hearts, at this
supreme moment, to an undying faith in the efficacy of non-
violence. The Working Committee, therefore, wisely said that
they ^vere not ready for the logical step. The tragedy of the
situation is that, if the Congress is to throw in its lot with those
who believe in the necessity of armed defence of India, the. past
twenty years will have been years of gross neglect of the primary
duty of congressmen to learn the science of armed warfare. And
235
236
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
I fear that history will hold me, as the general of the fight,
responsible for. the tragedy. The future historian will say that
I should have perceived that the nation was learning not non-
violence of the strong 'but merely passivity of the weak, and
that I should have, therefore, provided for congressmen’s military
training.
Being obsessed with the idea that somehow or other India
will learn true non-violence, it would not occur to me to invite
my co-workers to train themselves for armed defence. On the
•contrary, I used to discountenance a'U sword-play and the dis-
play of stout lathis. Nor am I even now repentant for the past.
I have the imquenchable faith that, of all the countries in the
world, India is the one country which can learn the aVt of non-
violence, that if the test were applied even now, there would be
found, perhaps, thousands of men and women who would be
willing to die without harbouring malice against their perse-
cutors. I have harangued crowds and told them repeatedly that
they might have to suffer much including death by shooting.
Did not thousands of men and women brave hardships during
the salt campaign equal to any that soldiers are called upon to
bear ? No different capacity is required from what has been
already evinced, if India has to contend against an invader.
Only it will have to be on vaster scale.
One thing ought not to be forgotten, India unarmed would
not require to be destroyed through poison gas or bombard-
ment. It is the Maginot line that has made the Siegfried line v
necessary. And vice versa. Defence of India by the present
methods has been necessary because she is an appendage of
Britain. Free India can have no enemy. And if her people have
learnt the art of saying resolutely * no ’ and acting up to it, I
dare say, no one would want to invade her. Our economy would
be so modelled as to prove no temptation for the exploiter.
But some congressmen will say : Apart from the British,
India has so many martial races within her border that they
will want to put up a fight for the country which is as much
theirs as ours.” This is perfectly true. I am therefore talking, •
for the moment, only of congressmen. How would they act in
the event of an invasion ? We shall never convert the whole of
India to our creed unless we are prepared to die for it.
The opposite course appeals me. Already, the bulk of the
army is manned by the Mussalmans of the North, Sikhs and
ON TRIAL
237
Gurkhas. If the masses of the South and the Centre wish to
become militarized, the Congress, which is supposed to represent
them, will have to enter into competition with the former. The
Congress will then have to be party to an enormous military
budget. There may be all these things without the Congress
consent. It will make all the difference in the world whether
the Congress is party to them or not. The world is looking for
something new and unique from India. The Congress will be
lost in the crowd, if it wears the same old outworn armour that
the world is wearing today. The Congress has a name because it
represents non-violence as a political weapon par excellence.
If the Congress helps the Allies as a representative of non-
violence, it wiU give to the Allied cause a prestige and a power
which will be invaluable in deciding the ultimate fate of the war.
But the members of the Working Committee have honestly and
bravely not made the profession of such non-violence.
My position is, therefore, confined to myself alone. I have
to find out whether I have any fellow-traveller along the lonely
path. If I am in the minority of one, I must try to make con-
verts. Whether one or many, I must declare my faith that it is
better for India to discard violence altogether even for defend-
ing her borders. For India to enter into the race for armaments-
is to court suicide. With the loss of India to non-violence the
last hope of the world will be ^one. I must live up to the creed
I have professed for the last half a century, and hope to the last
breath that India will make non-violence her creed, preserve
man’s dignity, and prevent him from reverting to the type from
which he is supposed to have raised himself.
Sevagram, 10-10-39
Harijan, 14-10-1939
91 .
A POSER
A Britisher has witten to Deenabandhu Andrew's a letter
on the war expounding his o^vn views. He is an ardent pacifist.
Deenabandhu has shared the letter with me. In it occur the
following paragraphs :
'"For India too I think that this is a very critical time. The
danger I see is that Britain may promise /izH Dominion Status
or something of the kind, and as a result India will raise an
army and become one more militaiy-minded nation. Her wit-
ness for the way of non-violence and soul force would then be
largely discounted.
How can Gandhiji as a believer in non-violence ask for
clarification of war aims with a view to getting Indian support
for Britain in this way of war ? The only thing that he can
do and that we should all be doing is to build up an army of
men and women who are committed to the way of love and
forgiveness and to receive, but never to return, violence. We
have to work this out to see how it will alter our daily life as
well as all our t hinkin g and acting towards other communities
and nations. We have to be disciplined in this and also to
learn to act together as one man. Along this line I see tremend-
ous possibilities.
Of course, we^ should also use all the influence we can to
urge Britain to acknowledge and put into practice fuU demo-
cracy in India, as it is a high principle quite apart from whether
India helps Britain in the war or not.”
The danger that the writer senses is real I dealt with it
last week. The writer cavils at my sympathy with the Allies.
I have shown it as an out-and-out believer in non-violence, even
because of my belief. Whilst all \dolence is .bad and must be
condemned in the abstract, it is permissible for, it is even the
duty of, a believer in ahimsa to distinguish between the aggres-
sor and the defender. Ha\dng done so, he will side with the
defender in a non-wolent manner, Le. give his life in sa\dng him.
His intervention is likely to bring a speedier end to the duel,
and may even result in bringing about peace between the com-
batants. Appl^nng the argument to the present v/ar, if the
Congress actively sides with the Allies in a non-vdolent vray, the
Congress assistance wdll lift the Allied cause to a high moral
23S
HINDU-MUSLIM CLASHES
239
plane, and the Congress influence will be effectively used in the
cause of peace. What is more it will be the special business of
the Congress to see that, if the war is fought to a finish, no humi-
liation is heaped upon the vanquished. That is the role I have
conceived for the Congress. The declaration of independence
has become a necessity. The question having been raised, the
Congress cannot help Britain, if Britain is secretly fighting for
imperialism while it declares to the world that the fight is for
saving democracies. For Britain to be in the right, a clear
declaration of her war aim is a necessity, irrespective of the
Congress policy.
Sevagram, 16-10-39
Harijan, 21-10-1939
92
HINDU-MUSLIM CLASHES
If proof were wanted to show that the non-violence of the
Congress was in effect violence in suspension or inactive
violence, it is furnished by the effective though quite indisci-
plined violence exhibited in Hindu-Muslim clashes. Had the
thousands of Hindus and Muslims who took part in the Khilafat
agitation been non-violent at heart, they could never have been
violent towards one another as they are continually found to be.
Nor can it be said that those who take part in the clashes are
not congressmen. If we ruld out all those who resort to violence
as non-congressmen, the Congress will cease to be a mass orga-
nization. For the combatants in these clashes are derived from
\
the masses. Moreover one finds today violence resorted to by
rival congressmen at Congress meetings. The gross indiscipline
and fraud practised at Congress elections are all illustrations of
Congress violence. It is difficult to say, therefore, who if any,
are non-violent congressmen. If they were in a majority in the
Congress and if they played an effective part in Hindu-Muslim
clashes, they could stop them^or at least give their lives in
stopping them. If the bulk of congressmen were truly Non-
violent, Muslims would be obliged to confess that congressmOT
could not be accused of anti-Muslim bias. It is not enough for
240 NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
congressmen to say that* they have not been found guilty of
incorrect attitude. I may be proved to be legally correct, but
may fail miserably if my action was examined In non-violent
scales. But this non-violence has to be non-violence of the
brave and the strong. It must come from inward conviction.
I have, therefore, not hesitated to say that it is better to be
violent, if there is violence in our breasts, than to put on the
cloak of non-violence to cover impotence. Violence is any day
preferable to impotence. There is hope for a violent man to
become non-violent. There is no such hope for the impotent.
Sevagram, 17-10-39
Harijan, 21-10-1939
93
UNCONDITIONAL SUPPORT ? ^
Several British friends are puzzled and ask, ‘‘Have you
really said you will give unconditional support to Great Britain
as you are reported to have said ? ” The origin of this report
lies in my very first statement after my talk with the Viceroy.
The phrase ‘ unconditional support ’ does not occur in that
statement. But had the Congress appreciated the position I
took up. Congress support would have been unconditional in
the sense that the Congress would not have asked for a clarifi-
cation of Britain’s war aims. But the Working Committee could
not honestly take up that position. Therefore it passed, as it
had every right and justification for passing, the resolution it
did. Events have shown the prudence of the course adopted by
the Working Committee. But had it waived the demand for the
declaration of war aims, the support would have been uncondi-
tional. 'Remember, according to its constitution, the Congress
is a non-violent body. Therefore its support would have been
purely moral. It has no soldiers to supply, it has no money to-
give. But it has its good wishes. In my opinion those good
wishes would have been more than many battali 9 ns. The Con- '
gress support would have put the British cause on an unassailable
moral basis. It would have made the British case just, beyond -
measure. All the dependent races of the earth would have felt
an indescribable glow of freedom. British moral stock would
THE HOUR OF TRIAL
241
have shot up high at a bound That is what the Congress un-
conditional support would have meant.
But God had willed otherwise. British statesmen had not
faith enough in the Congress profession of non-violence. I
must confess that the Congress could not pass the test to the
satisfaction of a strict though just examiner. Anyway my British
friends should have no difficulty in understanding my position.
Of course it is open to them to argue that as a war resister I
could not even give moral support. I have already said in these
columns that I do not hold such a view. It is open to a war
resister to judge between two combatants and wish success to
the one who has justice on his side. By so judging he is more
likely to bring peace between the two than by remaining a
mere* spectator.
Sevagram, 30-10-39
Harijan, 4-11-1939
. 94
THE HOUR OF TRIAL
‘‘If India takes up the doctrine of the sword, she may gain
momentary victory. Then Lidia will cease to be the pride of
my heart. I am wedded to India because I owe my all to her.
I believe absolutely that she has a mission for the world. She
is not to copy Europe blindly. India's acceptance of the doc-
trine of. the sword will be the hour of my trial. I hope I shall
not be found wanting. My religion has no geographical limits.
If I have a living faith in it, it will transcend my love for India
herself. My life is dedicated to service of India through the
religion of non-violence which I believe to be the root of
Hinduism.”
“The religion of non-violence is not meant merely for the
rishis and saints. It is meant for the common people as well.”
With tlie Working Committee
I quote these words from an article Gandhi ji wrote in
August 1920, but it looks as though they were uttered today.
With that living faith in non-violence as the peculiar contribu-
tion of India to the world, he' has tried to steer the course of our
sliip in fair weather and foul. Often enough the sky has been
N. V.~1G
242
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
darkened by spray, but we have never lost sight of the star.
The present storm threatens to obliterate the star from oiu: view,
b,ut the pilot has made it his business to warn us day in and day
out against losing sight of the star which alone can guide us to
the end of the voyage.
At the termination of the Working Committee meeting,
therefore, Gandhiji asked the members to consider the question
again, and decide once for aU what the Congress and congress-
men were going to do. The question affected not only our
relations with government but the relations between community
and community..
Gandhiji’s suggestion was discussed for many hours, but no
conclusion could be reached. At the next meeting of the Work-
ing Committee the question will come up again and a final de-
cision taken. In the nieanwhile members will have had enough
time to think over the matter. .
With the Gandhi Seva Sangh
The question has been engaging all Gandhiji’s time, so much
so that he has gone into perpetual silence except with people
whom he sees by appointment, and often he wakes up in the
early hours of the morning thinking about it. On the 25th
morning he woke up at one o’clock, and was thinking about what
he should say to the members of the executive of the Gandhi
Seva Sangh whom he was to meet in the afternoon. So to them
he said :
“ The problem haunts me. It gives me no rest. I have
described in Harijan the position of the junior members of the
Working Committee. Theirs was a difficult position. They were
torn between loyalty to a principle and loyalty to their
colleagues. But their eagerness to make their position clear to
me was most welcome. It shows that we are all votaries of
Truth, and even our mental struggles and conflicts arise out of
om anxiety to be faithful to it. We had a very fine discussion
in the Working Committee yesterday, and we discussed thread-
bare the position of the members as individuals and as repre-
sentatives of the Congress and the people. The question with
you is different. For .you are here in your indiwdual capacity,
and you have to decide your conduct no matter what Congress
or congressmen may think. The question is thus much simpler
for you. Will you adopt an attitude of brotherliness to one who
THE HOUR OP TRIAL
243
has done your dear ones a grievous injury ? Supposing Rajendra
Babu was attacked, would you retaliate or rather stand between
Rajendra Babu and the assailant and bear cheerfully the blows
meant for him ? You will do the latter, if you have shed all
fear of death and injury to limbs, and all considerations for the
domestic ties that bind you. But imless you have nothing but
brotherliness for those that despitefully .use you, your resolution
that you would stand by the principle of non-violence through
thick and thin will have no meaning. It would be far better to
wind up the Sangh than to have an empty resolution.
“Non-violence is not a cloistered virtue, confined only to
the 7^hi and the cave-dweller. It is capable of being practised
by the millions, not with full knowledge of its implications, but
because it is the law of oirr species. It distinguishes man from
the brute. But man has not shed the brute in him. He has to
strive to do so. This striving applies to the practice of non-
violence, not to the belief in it. I cannot .strive to believe in a
principle : I either believe in it or I do not. And if I believe in
it, I must bravely strive to practise it. Ahimsa is an attribute
of the brave. Cowardice and ahimsa do not go together any
more than water and fire. It^is that ahimsa that every member
of the Gandhi Seva Sangh has to make a conscious effort to
develop in himself. ■
“We have often thought about this question, but the hour
of our trial has arrived today, as much with reference to war
as with the struggle for Swaraj and equally with reference to
Hindu-Muslim vmity. Remember also that your non-violence
cannot operate effectively iinless you have faith in the spinning
wheel, I would ask you to read Hind Swaraj with my eyes and
see therein the chapter bn how to make India non-violent. You
cannot build non-violence on a factory civilization, but it can be
built on self-contained villages. Even if Hitler was so minded,
he could not devastate seven himdred thousand non-violent
villages. He would himself become non-violent in the process.
Rural economy as T have conceived it eschews exploitation
altogether, and exploitation is the essence of violence. You
have, therefore, to be rural-minded before you can be non-
\dolent, and to be rural-minded you have to have faith in the
spinning wheel,” /
244
NON-VIOKENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
Posers
The members slept over this discourse and met Gandhiji
again the next day. Numerous questions were troubling them^
as they should everyone who is a votary of ahimsa. But out of
regard for Gandhiji’s time they limited themselves to a few.
“ How can a believer in the non-violence of your conception
be a minister ?”
fear he cannot in the present state of things,” said
Gandhiji. ‘‘ We have seen that our ministers have had to resort
to violence even as the British government in the pre-autonomy
days. It was inevitable perhaps. Had congressmen been truly
non-violent, there would have been no resort to force. 'But the
Congress majorities were not based on unadulterated non-
violence. A minister said the other day that, although he had
not 'given up an iota of non-violence, he could not do without
resorting to 'the minimum of firing. He had resorted to it only
to the extent that it was unavoidable. He may have said it
then ; he may not say it again i£ I can help it. For, if he goes
in again, he will have made his position clear, and he will repre-
sent a House that is predominantly non-violent. In other
words, he will take office, if he is sure that the people would
let him carry on the government on a non-violent basis.”
But may it not be that whereas a non-violent minister will
confine violence to the lowest minimum, one who does not
believe in non-violence would observe no such restraint ? ”
“ That belief is a delusion. All those who are using violence
today make the same claim. Hitler too would say the same^
thing. General Dyer was acclaimed as the hero of the hour by
the House of Lords because his object was said to be to prevent
the spread of mob violence. Soviet Russia believes its violence
is a transitional stage to the establishment of an order without
violence. In the present state of our belief and practice it may
be better to wind up the Sangh, leaving each one to grow
unfettered.”
“But the suggestion is being made,” said Kishorlalbhai,
“ that we may confine the membership to those who are engaged
in constructive work.”
“That suggestion is good, and we can conceivably convert
the Sangh into such a body and then try each of us in our indi-
vidual capacity to purify ourselves as much as we can. For
THE HOUR OF TRIAL
245
non-violence is impossible without self-purification. Let us,
therefore, be members of a self-purification association, but no
.association is necessary for that purpose. Therefore let us try,
each in our own way, to face difiiculties and problems as they
come and see how far we can go. In Hudli, two years ago, I
asked you to help in the elections and in sending the best possi-
ble men to the legislature. I gave advice in the atmosphere as
it existed then. I cannot give you that advice today. In fact
the time may have come when it becomes necessary for such of
you as believe in the non-violence of the brave to retire from
the Congress as I did in 1934.”
“How do you think that the masses can practise non-
violence, when we know that they are all prone to anger, hate,
ill-will ? They are known to fight for the piost trivial things.”
“They are, and yet I think they can practise non-violence
ior the common good. Do you think the thousands of women
that collected contraband salt had ill-will against anyone ?
They knew that the Congress or Gandhi had asked them to do
certain things, and they did those things in faith and hope. To
my mind the most perfect demonstration of non-violence was
in Champaran. Did the thousands of ryots who rose up in
revolt against the agrarian evils harbour the least ill-will
against the government or the planters ? Their belief in non-
violence was unintelligent, even as the belief in the earth being
rotmd with many is unintelligent. But their belief in their
leaders was genuine, and that was enough. With those who
lead it is another matter. Their belief has got to be intelligent,
and they have to live up to all the implications of the belief.”
“ But then are not the masses the world over like that ?”
“ They are not, for others have not that background of non-
violence.”
“But if there was non-violence ingrained in our masses,
how should they have come to this state of slavery ?”
“ There indeed is what I flatter myself is going to be my
contribution. I want -that non-violence of the weak to become
non-violence of the brave. It may be a dream, but I have to
strive for its realization.”
Sevagram, 29-10,-39
Harijan, 4-11-1939
M. D.
95
SINDH RIOTS
I have been following the riots in Sindh with painful
interest. Many people delude themselves with the belief that
I possess powers to remedy all wrongs. I wish I had them,
though I am not sure that such possession will be an unmixed
blessing. I should make people helpless, if I made an indiscri-
minate use of such powers. And they would be of no use, if
I might not use them freely. As it is, I use what powers I have
to the fullest extent. Thank God, they are too limited to be
harmfuL My chief work, however, is to teach people to help
themselves.
Here is a pathetic wire from Shikarpur :
“Riots, loot, incendiarism. Sukkur district villages Hindns
mercilessly butchered, women and girls raped and kidnapped.
Hindu life, property unsafe. Situation most critical. Govern-
ment policy not firm. Pray send inquiry committee immediate-
ly to see situation personally. — President, Hindu General
Panchayat.”
It is the third of its kind from Sindh,* I took no notice of
the first two mainly because I was pre-occupied in Allahabad
and I had no concrete consolation to offer. The Shikarpur
Panchayat has come to the wrong person for help. For I am
myself helpless. The Congress has not yet sufficiently advanced
in non-violence to deal with riots and the like. It must develop
it enough to deal with such situations if it is to retain its prestige.
I suggested 'peace brigades*, but the suggestion proved pre-
mature if not unworkable. No doubt the Sindh government
. should be able to protect life and propeirty of the people within
their jurisdiction. Evidently the matter has gone beyond their
control. Sindh is nominally autonomous and to that extent less*
able to protect life and property than the preceding govern-
ment. For it has never had previous training in the policing or
the military arts. I have shown in previous writings that the
central government is impotent to prevent loss of life, property
and worse during riots. It is able to check their spread and
punish the wrong-doers when it ^vishes. It is organized solely
240
r
IN GOD’S GOOD HANDS
247
for the protection of •imperial trade and therefore for the main-
tenance of peace in so far as it is necessary for the safety of that
trade. Hence it is ill equipped for real protection of the people.
Such protection involves the training of the people in the art of
self-defence and securing their co-operation in queUing riots,
etc. This v;ould be putting imperial rule in jeop^dy.
Now the only effective way in which I can help the Sindhis
is to show them the way of non-violence. But that cannot be
learnt in a day. The other way is the way the world has
followed hitherto, i.e. armed defence of life and property. God
helps only those who help themselves. The Sindhis are no
exception. They must learn the art of defending themselves
against robbers, raiders and the like. If they do not feel safe
and are too weak to defend themselves, they should leave' the
place' which has proved too inhospitable to live in.
Sevagram, 28-11-39.
Harijan, 2-12-1939
96
IN GOD’S GOOD HAITOS
"Dear Friend,
I am unknown to you personally, but my wife and I came
very-near to being your host and hostess when you tlsited the
Greenfield Mill at Darwen, Lancashire, in 1931. I think I was
the first to express the hope that you might be willing to meet
personally our cotton operatives during your stay in England
that year, a period of distress through widespread unemploy-
ment in Lancashire ; and this was conveyed to you through my
friend C. F. Andrews. Just before the time for the visit arrived,
however, we left’ our Darwen home and our work as welfare
supervisors at the Greenfield factory, to start a new life in
charge of the Quaker International Centre in Berlin ; and you
were entertained by our friends and successors, Charles and
Harriet Haworth.
. Through 51 years’ residence in Germany with our family
of four young children we have come to know and to love very
many people in that country, and have also watched and shared
at first hand all the tragic developments, moral and political,
of this time. "We were, however, already well acquainted with
Germany and her people through the Quaker relief work for
248
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
starving children after the last war, in which we had been
privileged to take part.
I read with deep interest and inspiration, in the early days
of this war, a few lines written by you in Harijari, which have
been a great help and comfort to me in these troubled times.
They are as follows : ‘ I personally would not purchase my own
country's freedom by violence, even if such a thing were possi-
ble. . . My faith that what is gained by the sword will also be
lost by the sword, is imperishable.' I have been encouraged,
after mentioning my thoughts to my friend Agatha Harrison,
to write and tell you what I have had so much in mind during
these first distressful weeks of war. She has kindly let me see
something of what you have written on the subject of the war
. situation, which helped me to understand your attitude towards
it, but still leaves me under the sense of a deep concern which
T now ask permission to lay before you.
I meet so often nowadays even fine and convinced Iriends
of peace who, in view of the brutal suppression of independence
in countries like Czechoslovakia and Poland, feel themselves in
a moral dilemma; who take the view that when such things
happen war is inevitable and even right for their country, in the
attempt to restore what has been lost — though as individuals
they would probably dissociate themselves from it. I have won-
dered whether this -is not the moment when such an acknow-
ledged spiritual prophet and leader as you are, might give a
clarion call to the whole world, pointing to another way than
the senseless gamble and destruction of war; another way, not
merely for the settling of disputes but far more important, for
resistance to evil and even for the attainment of political aims.
The war method, as we experienced in 1914-1918, seems inevit-
ably to vitiate its own ends, however goodiihese may be at the
outset; whereas the moral means of non-violence and redemp-
tive love do but strengthen and purify the aims, in so far as
these are ’based on moral right and justice. This you have
taught us. It seems to me that a lead from one with your
spiritual authority along the lines of a better way than war to
help the stricken andvoppressed, whether -individuals or nations,
might come with redeeming power to many who find themselves
in the distress of a moral dilemma at present time, and release
spiritual energies which, because of this dilemma, arc lamed
and useless, or are prostituted in the attempt to supply uplift
and inspiration for the pursuit of a holy war for civilization,
freedom — or of the mere negative aim of destroying Hitlerism
by successful rivalry in its own methods.
“ I have no moral right to judge — sadly the contrary — but I
know that you appreciate frankness, and I therefore venture to
confess myself puzzled that, so far from seizing this opportunity
IN GOD^S GOOD HANDS
249
to proclaim the better way in which you have been such a mag-
nificent pioneer, you appear (I feel sure I am mistaken or mis-
understand) to be thinking mainly of what political advantage
for the cause of independence in India can be gained from the
war situation. One almost has the impression that the oppor-
tunity which war presents is welcomed, and that support for the
Allies in the attempt to gain their ends through war would
be gladly given if an adequate bargain were forthcoming.
I have no special knowledge of Indian affairs, but, relying
on the judgment of my best friends who have close association
with the best opinion in India, I am eager for the realization of
their hopes and yours; but I would hope for this as the outcome
of a liberal movement of mind in our own people and Govern-
ment as part of a generous desire and determination for a new
and better world instead of one filled with aggression and im-
perialist domination — rather than as a bargain by imperialist
Britain without any change of mind, primarily for the purpose
of obtaining the material support of India in winning the war.
My heart cries to you out of its distress and despair caused
by the war. I have seen so much that is good in the German
people, the self-giving idealism of its youth whom I love, as
wen as the evil with which I am so intimately acquainted
through trying to help the victims. I have been in a Nazi prison,
and have believed that through my suffering there has been
shown to me a nobler way to help the splendid young men
of Germany and of my own country, than the way we are about
to employ, of driving millions of them to slaughter one another.
I believe that many people throughout the world are longing
to see the way out of this evil into which we are slowly slipping
deeper and deeper, until it may soon be too late. Perhaps
you alone can help us. I write to you in deep concern to beg
you to consider whether it may not be laid upon you to do so.
With deep esteem and love,
49, Parliament Hill, Your friend sincerely,
London, N. W. 3. CORDER CATCHPOOL”
I know that this letter reflects the attitude of many English-
men who look to me for showing the better way. Sir Radha-
krishnan's collection of tributes on my completing seventy years
has deepened the hope of thousands of peace lovers. But I know
what a poor instrument I am for the fulfilment of that hope.
Admirers have given me credit I do not deserve. I am not able
to testify that India furnishes the world with a good example of
non-violence of the strong and therefore as a substitute for
armed resistance against an aggressor. India undoubtedly has
250
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
shown the efficacy of passive non-violence as a weapon of the
weak. But useful as it is as a substitute of terrorism, I claim no
ne^vness or merit for it. It is no contribution to the peace move-
ment.
It is no wonder that my identification with the Congress
demand appears to contradict my previous writing quoted by
my correspondent. There is, however, no contradiction. Even
now as then I would not gain independence at the cost of non-
violence. The critic might retort that, if the British Government
made the required declaration, I would be helping the Allies and
thereby taking part in violence. The retort would be reasonable
but for the fact that the additional help that Britain would gain
from the Congress would be purely moral The Congress would
contribute neither men nor money. The moral influence would
be used on the side of peace. I have already said in these
columns that my non-violence does recognize different species of
\dolence — defensive and offensive. It is true that in the long nm
the difference is obliterated, but the initial merit persists. A
non-violent person is bound, when the occasion arises, to say
which side is just. Thus I wished success to the Abyssinians,
the Spaniards, the Czechs, the Chinese and the Poles, though in
each case I wished that they could have offered non-violent resist-
ance. In the present case, if the Congress could justify the
British case on the high groimd professed by Mr. Chamberlain,
India declared free would throw in her whole moral weight on
the side of peace. The part I am pla3ring is, in my opinion,
strictly non-violent. There is no spirit of bargaining behind the
Congress demand which itself is wholly moral. There is no de-
sire to embarrass the Government. There is to be no precipitate
civil disobedience. Care is being taken to meet every just
objection to the Congress demand and to smooth every difficulty
in the way of Great Britain making the requisite declaration.
The greatest strain is being put upon impatient congressmen
spoiling for a fight though non-violent. I myself want to be able
to play an effective part in bringing peace nearer. I might be
able to do so if India becomes in fact an independent ally of
Britain, though the legal process is delayed till the v/ar is ended.
But who am I ? I have no strength save what God gives me.
I have no authority over my countrymen save the purely moral.
SINDH TRAGEDY
251
If He holds me to be a pure instrument for the spread of non-
violence in the place of the^awful Violence now ruling the earth,
He will give the strength and show me the way. My greatest
weapon is mute prayer. The cause of peace is, therefore, in God’s
good hands. Nothing can happen but by His will expressed in
His eternal, changeless Law which is He. We neither know Him
nor His Law save through the glass darkly. But the faint
glimpse of the Law is sufficient to fill me with joy, hope, and
faith in the future.
Sevagram, 5-12-39
Harijan, 9-12-1939
97
SINDH TMGEDY
I have before me several letters from Sindh and a longish
report from Dr. Choithram over the recent riots in Sukkur and
Shikarpur, The Sindh Hindus should remember that Sindh has
a national government. Though for the sake of brevity I have
often used the term Congress government, the proper expression
is national democratic government as distinguished from foreign
bureaucratic government, which it replaces. Whilst in discussing
domestic differences and party politics we have to speak of Con-
gress and Muslim League governments, we must for all other
purposes think and speak in terms of national government. And
so those who feel aggrieved must appeal to their provincial
national governments and cultivate public opinion in favour of
justice and public tranquillity. It would be wrong always to
think in commimal terms. I know that we may not shut our
eyes to hard facts. But to attribute everything to the communal
spirit is a sign of inferiority complex. It may well perpetuate
what is yet a temporary distemper in the national life.
But, as I Jhave already suggested, contrasted with irrespon-
sible bureaucracy, national governments would be found to be
weak in action because of their responsibility to the people in
whose name and by whose goodwill alone they can rule. They
can, therefore, deal with crimes with more or less success, but
252 ,
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
they will be found to be powerless to deal with popular upheavals
which communal riots are. British military aid will not always
be at their disposal. National governments will cease to be
national, if they have to depend on British military aid. More-
over, if the Congress policy of non-violence becomes universal
among all parties, military and even -police aid must become
taboo. Before the other parties can be expected to become non-
violent, Congressmen have to express non-violence in ample
measure in their daily conduct. Be that, however, as it may, I
can only advise the afflicted people of Sindh in terms of non-
violence.
The question in Sindh is not really one between Hindus and
Muslims, It is essentially one between weak people and strong.
Muslims fight among themselves as badly as with Hindus.
Hindus have also been known to fight among themselves. It will
be wrong to weigh ferocity in golden scales.
Hinduism has become a synonym for weakness and Islam
for physical strength. Hindus, although they have been taught
to believe in ahimsa, have not shown en masse the strength of
<ihi7nsa, have never shown its superiority, when matched against
physical strength. I have maintained that superiority- over
physical strength, however overwhelming, is the core of ahimsa,
and I have further maintained that this non-violence can be
exercised as weU by individuals as by groups of them, yea, even
by millions together. The experiment is still in the making.
Sufficient evidence has accumulated 'during the past twenty
years to show that the experiment is worth making. Nothing
can possibly be lost by continuing it, provided of course that the
non-violence is of the standard brand.
Nothing has come imder my observation to show that there
was in Sukkur or Shikarpur even one person who believed in
and practised non-violence of the strong. Had there been one,
we would surely have known of him as we know of Ganesh
Shankar Vidyarthi. One such person can any day give a better
account of himself than one armed to the teeth.
There are many Congressmen in Sukkur and Shikarpur, but
they are not non-violently organized. It is not their fault. They
know no better. As I have been repeatedly saying nowadays,
our non-violence has not been of the strong. Weak people
SINDH TRAGEDY
253.
cannot develop it all of a sudden. But I have no other drug in
my chest. I can only prescribe what I have and what has never
failed. I can only, therefore, say : ^ Try and try again until yon
succeed.’ In the composition of the truly brave there should be
no malice, no anger, no distrust, no fear of death or physical hurt.
Non-violence is certainly not for those who lack these essential
qualities. Wherever there are such persons they should be able
to cover the weak ones, provided of course that they would
listen to their helpers.
Let the weak ones never rely upon armed help. Such help
will only make them weaker. If they have not the capacity for
non-violent resistance, they should learn the art of defending
themselves. It does not require a strong body ; it requires a
stout heart. The African Negroes have become, or were 25 years
ago, so terror-stricken that they could not face a White lad — a
pigmy compared to the giant-framed Negroes. White children
were trained from their infancy not to fear the Negroes. The
first lesson, therefore, for those who will learn how to defend *
themselves is to shed the fear of being hurt or being kiUed. I
would like them to observe the laws of the game. Just as there
is such a thing as honour among thieves, there should
surely be honour between combatants. One hears so often
of children and old men being butchered, women being
outraged. If men must become beasts, there might even then be
some, decency observed. Religion is outraged when an outrage
is perpetrated in its name. Almost all the riots in this imhappy
land take place in the name of religion, though they might have
a political motive behind them. My chief point is that the exist-
ing situation is intolerable. Cowardice should have no place in
the national dictionary.
I have suggested hijrat I repeat the suggestion. It is not
unpractical. People do not know its value. High and mighty
have been known to have resorted to it before now. Planned
hijrat requires courage and forethought. The second book of
the Old Testament is known as Exodus. It is an account of the
planned flight of the Israelites. In exile they prepared for a
military career. In modern times we .have the example of the
flight of the Doukhobours from Russia owing to persecution.
Theirs was. no military career. On the contrary they were
254
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
non-violent. There is, therefore, nothing wrong, dishonourable or
cowardly in self-imposed exile, India is a vast country. Though
poor, it is well able to admit of inter-migration especially of those
who are capable, hard-working and honest. The people of
Sukkur and Shikarpm: have all the three qualities. They must
appeal to the Government. Only they can give very little help.
Apart from political pacts local heads among Hindus and
Muslims may’ meet with mutual profits. It can do no body or
party any good to promote mutual slaughter and consequent
increase in the existing ill-will. But if no honourable local
settlement is arrived at, and if the local residents do not feel able
to defend themselves and their families and possessions non-
violently or violently, I have no doubt that they, should vacate
the place in which they live in perpetual fear of their lives and
honour of their womenfolk.
Sevagram, 1-1-40
Harijan, 6-1-1940
98
SINDH TRAGEDY
Q. In your article “ Sindh Tragedy ” you have advised the
oppressed Hindus of Sindh to perform hijrat if they cannot
protect their honour and self-respect by remaining in Sindh.
Where do you expect them to go ? Who will provide them the
wherewithal in their place of refuge ? May I further ask you if
the remedy of hijrat is meant for the Hindus only ? Why do
you not advise hijrat to the Mussalmans in the Congress pro-
vinces who complain so loudly of ‘ oppression ’ ? As it is you
have given them weightage in provinces in which they are in
a minority and a statutory majority in the Punjab where tliey
are numerically superior.
A. My advice to migrate is for all who feel oppressed and
caimot-.hve without loss of self-respect in a particular place. If
the Muslims where they are in a minority were really oppressed
and they sought my advice, I should give them the same advice
I have given to the Sindh Hindus. But, as a general rule, they
SINDH TRAGEDY
255
are capable of holding their own even when they are in a
minority. I have already told the Sindhis that, if they have the
bravery to d.efend themselves even though they are a handful,
they should not leave the places where they are settled. .My
advice is meant for those who, thqugh they are conscious of
self-respect, lack the strength that comes from non-violence or
the capacity to return blow for blow.
The question what the refugees should do after migration is
surely secondary. A few thousand of them can be easily absorb-
ed in a vast country like India. Sindhis are enterprising. They
are scattered all over the world, I hardly think any pubhc
appeal will be necessary. Let them know that there are refugees
from Limbdi, who are bravely and silently bearing their exile.
A ,keen sense of honour turns every privation into a joy. But
perhaps migration wiU be mmecessary. I see signs of Muslim
leaders realizing ^their responsibility and making arrangements
to create among the Hindus concerned a sense of secmrity. If
this happens, it would be as it should be.
The question of my befriending the Ali Brothers is surely
irrelevant to the great issue I have raised. I am not sorry for
anything I have done in connection with cdmmunal tmity. I
should repeat the same thing under similar circmnstances.
Neither community has lost by the unity of the Khilafat days,
temporary though it unfortmiately proved to be. You' are wrong
in holding me responsible for the Communal Decision. It has
nothing to commend itself to any commimity except the solid
fact that we are living imder it and that we have not yet found
an agreed formula to replace it.
Sevagram, 29-1-40
Harijan, 3-2-1940
99
A PACIFIST’S DOUBTS
I give these details in order to give the reader an idea of the
development and evolution of pacifism. No wonder then that,
whilst the pacifists appreciated the position taken up by India,
their difficulty was how, if Gandhiji accepted the Allied cause
as just and said that he would pray for the victory of Britain,
he had advised the Congress ndt to offer its co-operation to
Britain.
Whether the questioner’s difficulty arose from pacifism or
from the Congress demand for declaration of the war aims was
not quite clear. But Gandhiji explained that any co-operation or
non-co-operation that the Congress could offer would be moral
and not material. Materially Britain’s position would not be
affected by either attitude, for the contribution in men and
money that Britain exacted from India as a subject nation would
continue. When a non-violent India wished Britain victory, it
was not victory for Britain, right or wrong, but victory for
Britain which in going to war against Germany was less in the
VTong and more in the right. But if there was no satisfactory
declaration of the war aims regarding India, the moral support
that Britain would gain would not be forthcoming. The result
would be quite different, if the Congress were indifferent as to
means. She would in that case foment a rebellion and offer
effective obstruction.
“ Now it would be mental violence and not physical
violence ? ” the friend asked.
“Maybe,” said Gandhiji. “But the non-co-operation that
may come would be non-violent. Mental violence has no
potency and injures only the person whose thoughts are violent.
It is otherwise ■with mental non-violence. It has potency which
the world does not yet know. And what I want is non--violence
of the thought and deed.
“ Such non-violent support can be available to Britain only
if her cause is demonstrably just, even though from a pacifist
standpoint her means are violent and therefore bad. Her cause
250
UNIVERSAL CONSCRIPTION
257
will not be just if she is not just to India, i.e., if of her owm
accord and without reference to the parties in India she does not
wash her hands clean of the imperialist exploitation^ of India.
Therefore, non-violent India’s prayer will be for Britain’s victory
w’hen she declares in unequivocal terms that India is a free
nation in action now, and in law as soon as possible, may be even
during the war. This she will do from, the heart only when
she begins to' rely more on the efficacy of the moral support of
non-violent India .than on her own strong arm. If England can
take this step, the war will end in peace through moral force,
rather than through superiority of arms.”
Sevagram, 15-1-40 M. D.
Harijan, 20-1-1540
f 100
UNIVERSAL CONSCRIPTION
Q. You say millions are xmarmed and unused to wielding
arms. But what is the difficulty, when India is free, in training
the whole nation in the -use of arms by means of^imiversal
conscription ?
A. Of course in theory there is nothing to prevent the train-
ing by universal conscription. Only I think that the people of
this land'-would not take to arms easily even though conscription,
may be resorted to. In any event arming of the millions, or-
even a few, is outside my province. It is repugnant to me. BuL
what I would conscript is productive, labour, skilled and im-
skilled. This, I hold would be the easiest and the most effective
method of organizing society on a peaceful footing.
Sevagram, 28-1-40
Harijan, 3-2-1940
N. V. 17
101
THE QUESTION OF DEFENCE
So far as defence is concerned, surely it will be the primary
concern of free India to make her owm arrangements. It may
well be that India would want elaborate preparation and would
want Britain’s help, if it is given, in enabling her to do so.
Thanks to imperial policy, unarmed India is left wholly unpro-
tected except by the British bayonet and Indian soldiers whom
British power has brought into being. It is a position humiliating
alike for Britain and for India. I am personally* unconcerned
because, if I could carry India with me, I would want nothing
beyond a police force for protection agaimt dacoits and the like.
But so far as defence is concerned unarmed peaceful India would*
rely upon the goodwill of the whole world. But I know that that
is only a dream at the present moment.*
Harijan, 10-2-1940
■ 102
MORE CALUMNY
Q. You did not hesitate to join the Ali Brothers in their
intrigue to invite Amanulla 'Khan to invade India and set up
Muslim Raj. You drafted a wire for Maulana Mahomed Ali
advising the then Amir not to enter into a treaty with the British.
The late Swami Shraddhanandji is reported to have seen the
draft. And now you want the Hindus of Sindh to make a present
of their hearths and homes to their Mussalman oppressors
instead of demanding the re-amalgamation of Sindh with the
Bombay province, which alone can restore the reign of law to
Sindh. Why won’t you realize that in this age of enlightenment
and progress what the minorities expect is effective protection
of their due rights, not mere pious counsels of perfection ?
♦ From a press interview given at Delhi on C-2-’40.
258
\
MORE CALUMNY
259
A. ‘i have several such letters. Hitherto I have ignored
them. But now I see that the news has gone through a revised
and enlarged edition in the Hindu Mahasabha. An angry cor-
respondent threatens that persons like him will begin to believe
what has been stated so authoritatively. For the sake of my re-
putation, therefore, I must answer the question. But my corres-
pondents should know that life for me would be a burden, if-,1
were to make it a point of controverting every false report about
me or distortion of my writing. A reputation that requires such
a mud wall of protection is not worth keeping. So far as the
charge of my intriguing with the Amir is concerned I can say
that there is no truth whatsoever in it. Further, I know that
the Brothers stoutly denied the charge when it was brought to
their notice. And I believed them implicitly. I do not remember
having drafted any telegram on behalf of Maulana Mahomed Ali
to the then Amir. The alleged telegram is harmless in itself and
does not warrant the deduction drawn from it. The late Swamiji
never referred the matter to me for confirmation. It' is wrong
to say anything against dead men unless one has positive proof
and stating it is relevant. The romance has been woven round
my writings in Young India."^ Deductions drawn from them are
vdiolly unjustified. I would not be guilty of inviting any power
to invade In^a for the purpose of expelling the English. For
one thing, it would be contrary to my creed of non-violence. For
another, I have too great a respect for English bravery and arms
to think that an invasion of India can be successful without a
strong combination of different powers.. In any case, I have no
desire to substitute British rule with any other foreign rule. I
want unadulterated Home Rule, however inferior in quality it
may be. My position remains today what it was when I wrote
the Young India paragraphs now sought to be used against me.
Let me further remind .the readers that I do not believe in secret
methods.
As for Sindh my advice stands. Re-incorporation of Sindh in
the Bombay province may or may not be a good proposition on
other groimds, but certainly it is not for the purpose of greateV
protection of life and property. Every Indian, be he Hindu or any
other, must learn the art of protecting himself. It is the condi-
* Chapters 3 to 6 (pp. 6-14) in this book.
260
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
tion of real democracy. The State has a duty. But no State can
protect those who will not share with it the duty of protecting
themselves.
On the way to Delhi, 4-2-40
ffanjcTi, 10-2-1940
103
MY ADVICE TO NOAKHALI HINDUS
Manoranjan Babu and other friends from Noakhali came to
see me during my stay in Malikanda about the difficulties of the
Hindus in their locality. Manoranjan Babu has been in corres-
pondence with me in the matter for some time. I have not
examined the grievances. I had neither the time nor the wish
to do so. That is the special province of the Provincial Congress
Committee and finally the central body. But I had no difficulty
in giving general advice. Their case is more or less like the
Sukkur case. There is a great difference in degree. But I feel
sure that no popularly elected government can successfully cope
with wide-spread goondaism as it is alleged to be in Noakhali. It
is essentially a case of self-defence. Self-respect and honour
cannot be protected by others. They are for each individual
himself or herself to gu^d. Governments can at best punish
offenders after the offence has been committed. They cannot
assure prevention except in so far as punishment acts as a
deterrent. Self-defence can be violent or non-violent. I have
always advised and insisted on non-violent defence. But I recog-
nize that it has to be learnt like violent defence. It requires
a different training from that which is required for violent de-
fence. Therefore, if the capacity for non-violent self-defence is ^
lacking, there need be no hesitation in using violent means. But
Manoranjan Babu, being an old congressman, said, “You say I
cannot retaliate even in self-defence ? “ That is certainly my
view,” I replied. There was, however, a resolution passed by
the Gaya Congress that the use of force in self-defence was per-
missible to congressmen. I have never justified the resolution.
Non-violence becomes meaningless, if violence is permitted for
self-defence. What is it but self-defence in national resistance
I
261
MY ADVICE' TO NOAKHALI HINDUS
against an aggressor nation ? I would, therefore, advise secession
from the Congress, if you contemplate the use of force in de-
feriding yourselves in the circumstances described hy you.”
But,” said Manoranjan Babu, supposing I adopt the Gaya
resolution, would I be accused of communalism, if I defended the
aggrieved Hindus ? ” “ Certainly not,” I replied, “ In the first
placej you do' not cease to be Hindu because you are a cpngress-
man. ^ You will, however, be guilty of communalism, if you
sided witK Hindus right or wrong. In the case in point you will
defend Hindus, not because they are Hindus but because they
are afflicted. I would expect you to defend Muslims if you found
them molested^by Hindus. A congressman recognizes or should
recognize no communal distinction.” ^
The interviewers then discussed the Congress dissensions,
and told m6 that many Hindus ^ despairing of Congress aid had ..
joined the Hindu Mahasabha, and isked whether^ they could do
likewise. I told them that in theo^ I could 'see no objection.
V/hether the Tocal circumstances justified the step or not I could
not judge. But if I was a congressman' and 'found that as such I
could not' act effectively, I shoidd not hesitate to join an organi-
zation which could render effective assistance, I added, however,
that no responsible congressman could hold office in a Congress
organization and yet be a member of the Hindu Mahasabha
which is frankly a communal organization. The whole question
bristles with 'difficulties. The occasion demands calmness,
truthfulness and boldness. Communalism is bound to win, if the
Congress cannot become effectively non-violent. It will itself
become communal in action, "4f it plays with non-violence. For
the' majority of congressmen who are Hindus are boimd to drift
into violence, if they" do not know the effective use of non-
violence. I am quite clear in my mind that the Congress can
remain non-communal only if it becomes truly non-violent in all
matters. It cannot be non-violent only towards the rulers and
violent towards others. That way lie disgrace and disaster.
Calcutta, 26-2-40
Harijan, 2-3-1940
104
WHEN THE BRITISH WITHDRAW
''Unless you adopt 'an all-party form of govemraejit, you
are paving the way towards sowing Hindu-Muslim conflict after
the British protection is withdrawn. It was not non-violence
but your tremendous magnetism plus the backing of British
bayonet that kept the Congress in power. Try non-violence
without the latter for two or three months, and the truth of the
above will be- realized.”
Thus writes an esteemed correspondent. I have no difficulty
in endorsing the remark that it was the.British bayonet that kept
the Congress ministries in power. My ‘magnetism’ may have
had something to do with the victory at the polls. But it proved
utterly useless to keep the ministries in power. The sustaining
force was the British bayonet. This only shows -that the people
at large have not yet imbibed the lesson of non-violence.
The remedy is not an all-party goverrunent. Such \vill be
no government of the people for the people. ^ It will be the gov-
ernment of a caucus for its own ends. The caucus will have no
smoother sailing than the Congress ministries had. It will also
have to rely upon the British bayonet. There can be no manly
peace in the land unless the British bayonet is withdrawn. The
risk of riots has to be run. Non-violence will be born out of
such risks, if at all it is to be part of national life. It is daily
becoming crystal clear that real unity will not come so long as
the British bayonet crushes the free spirit of the people. The
peace it imposes is the peaqe of the grave. I feel that riots \Yill
be a welcome relief, if that is the price we have to pay for free-
dom. For out of them I can conceive the possibility of peace
coming, not out of the present unreality. The way out of riots on
the one hand and British bayonets on the other is frank accep-
tance of non-'vdolence. To this my life is dedicated, and my faith
in its possibility and efficacy will survive the dissolution of my
body.
On the train to Wardha, 3-3-40
Harijan, 9-3-1940
2G2
105
SOME QUESTIONS
‘‘May I ask one or two more important questions before
leaving said Chinese friend. “ Do you expect to see India
independent ?
“ Yes, of course/’ came the reply in no uncertain terms. “ I
want to see India free in my lifetime. But God may not consider
me fit enough to see the dream of life fulfilled. Then I shall
quarrel, not with Him but with myself.”
“ But without an army how can you ever succeed ? ”
“ Well, we have done so thus far. We are nearing our goal
without having fired a single shot. It will be a miracle, if we
succeed. But there is nothing to make me doubt the eflScacy of
the weapon of non-violence. Whether, however, we have the re-
quisite degree of it within us has yet to be proved.”
“ Is there hatred against the British ? ”
“Yes — alas — but if we remain non-violent, hatred will die
as everything does from disuse.”
, “ It is very hard for us to get rid of hatred against Japan.”
“Yes, it will take generations for you as you are using
violence against them. I do not say that you should not have
defended yourselves violently, but under those circumstances
hatred cannot die.”
“ Are the British easier to deal with than any other people ? ”
“ iliey are as easy, in terms of non-violence, to deal with as
anyone else. But not having dealt with anyone else I cannot say
from practical experience. All conquerors of India have reacted
to what is noble in Indian culture and in Indian nature, the
Muslims included. I believe the Germans would have done like-
\vise. It may even be that the English reaction has been less than
what others’ may have been because of' their insularity and
colour prejudice.”
’ Set^agram, 7-4-40 A. K.
.Harijan, 13-4-1940
2G3
106
\
TWO QUESTIONS FROM AMERICA
A friend writing from America propounds the following two
questions : " . .
1. Granted that satyagraha is capable of winning India’s
independence, what are the'’ chances of its being accepted as
a principle of State policy in a free India? In other words,
would a strong and ^ independent India rely on satyagraha as
a method of self-preservation, or would it lapse back to seeking
refuge in the age-old institution of war, however defensive *
its character ? To restate the question on the basis of a purely
theoretic problem : Is satyagraha likely to be accepted 'only
in an uphill battle, when the phenomenon of martyrdom is
fully effective, or is it also to be the instrument of a sovereign
authority which has neither the need nor the scope of behaving
on the principle of martyrdom?
2. '' Suppose a free India adopts satyagraha as an instru-
ment of State policy, how would she defend herself against pro-
bable aggression by another sovereign State? To restate the
question on the basis .of a purely theoretic problem : What
would be the satyagrahic action-patterns to meet the invading
army at the frontier? What kind of resistance can be offered
the opponent before a common area of action, such as the one
now existing in India between the Indian nationalists and the
British government, is established ? Or should the satyagrahis
withhold their action until after the opponent has taken over
the country ? ”
^ /
The questions are admittedly theoretical. They are aUo pre-
mature for the reason that I have not mastered the whole
technique of non-violence. The experiment is still in the making.
It is not even in its advanced stage. The natiure of the experi-
ment requires one .to be satisfied with one step at a time. The
distant scene is not for him to see. Therefore my answers can
only be speculative.
In truth, as I have said before, now we are not having
unadulterated non-violence even in our struggle to win
independence.
As to ' the first question, I fear that the chances of non-
violence being accepted as a principle of State policy are very
2G4
TWO QUESTIONS PROM AMERICA
265
slight, so far as I can see at present. If India does not accept
non-violence as her policy after winning independence, the second
question becomes superfluous. •
But I may state my own individual* view of the potency of
non-violence. I believe that a State can be administered on a
non-violent basis, if the vast majority of the people are non-
violent. So far as I know, India is the only coimtry which has a
possibility of being such a State. I am conducting my experiment
in that faith. Supposing, therefore, that India attained independ-
ence through piure non-violence, India could retain it too by the
same means. A non-violent man or society does not anticipate or
provide for attacks from without. On the contrary, such a
person or society firmly believes that nobody is going to disturb
them. If the worst happens, there are two ways open to non-
violence, To 3deld possession, but non-co-operate with the
aggressor. Thus supposing that a modern edition of Nero
descended upon India, the representatives of the State, will let
him in, but tell him that he wiU get no assistance from the people.
They will prefer death to submission. The second way would
,be non-violent resistance by the people who have* been trained
in the non-violent way. They would offer themselves unarmed
as fodder for the aggressor’s cannons. The underlying belief in
either case is that even a Nero is not devoid of a heart. The im-
expected spectacle of endless rows upon rows of men and women
simply dying rather than surrender to the will of an aggressor
must ultimately melt him and his soldiery. Practicall^ speaking
there will be probably no greater loss in men than if forcible
rfesistance was offered ; there will be no expenditure in arma-
ments and fortifications. The non-violent training received by
the people will add inconceivably to their moral height. Such
men and women will have shown personal bravery of a type far
superior to »that shown in armed warfare. In each case the
bravery consists in dying, not in killing. Lastly, there is no such
thing as defeat in non-violent resistance. That such a thing has
not happened before is no answer to my speculation. I have '
drawn no impossible picture. History is replete with instances
of individual non-violence of the type I have mentioned. There
is no warrant for saying or thinking that a group of men and
women cannot by sufficient training act non-violently as a group
266
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
or nation. Indeed the sum 'total of the experience of mankind is
that men somehow or other live on — from which fact I infer that
it is the law of love that rules mankind. Had violence, i.e. hate,
ruled us, we should have become extinct lohg ago. And yet the i
tragedy of it is that the so-called civilized men and nations con-
duct themselves as if the basis of society was violence. It gives
me ineffable joy to make experiments proving that love is the
supreme and only law of life. Mucli evidence to the contrary
cannot shake my faith. Even the mixed non-violence of India
has supported it. But if it is not enough to convince an un-
believer, it is enough to incline a friendly critic to view it with
favour.
Sevagram, 8-4-40
Harijan, 13-4-1940
107
OF WHAT AVAIL IS NON-VIOLENCE ?
An Indian friend writes : -
“Yesterday Reuter in pathetic terms related how the popu-
lation of Norway under the rain of bombs and machine gun
bullets was fleeting from towns completely demoralized and
in panic. It is shocking that such good people » should so
suddenly be reduced to this helpless condition simply because
they had neither the will nor the resources to develop the
techmque of destruction into a fine art- .-The futility of violence,
and also, I fear, its temporary efiQcacy, is being proved. Of
what avail was the violent defence of Norway ? And yet for
the time being the bigger violence of Germany seems to have
succeeded! Let us hope eventually everyone will see the futility
of violence and a new era may dawn. But are we really making
a non-violent contribution towards the world problem? Of
what avail is our non-violence to Norway, Sweden and Den-
mark? Virtually, are we not giving a handle to Germany?
True, we are doing nothing beyond embarrassing Great Britain,
and perhaps we may say that such an embarrassment is in-
evitable and is not caused deliberately. But the fact remains
that England is in distress, and by our action we are embar-
rassing not only England but all other good nations who have
been victims of aggression.^ We are not likely, it seems, to
succeed in , changing England's heart. And victims like Noru*ay
etc. can never appreciate our attitude. In the light of our
OF WHAT AVAIL IS NON-VIOLENCE ?
267
present attitude, the international world can with justification
misinterpret our past help to victims of aggression like China
and Spain. Were they more deserving of our help than the
present victims? And if not, then why this distinction? Sim-
■ ply because an imperialist power, even for the sake of its own
interest, happens to decide to do something which is noble
and moral! You have never regretted your action during the
last war when you vigorously recruited people for military pur-
poses. This time your attitude appears to be in sharp contrast,
although you say that both attitudes are right.”
My correspondent is not alone in bemoaning the lot of most
cultured and inoffensive people like the Danes and the Norwe-
gians. This war is showing the futility of violence. Supposing
Hitler becomes victorious over the Allies, he will never subjugate
England and France. It will mean another war. Supposing the
Allies are victorious, the world will fare no better. They will be
more polite but not less ruthless, unless they learn the lesson of
non-violence during the war and imless they shed the gains;
they have made 'through violence. The first condition of non-
violence is justice all roimd in every department of life. Perhaps
it is too much to expect of human nature; I do not, however,
think so. No one should dogmatize about the capacity of human
nature for degradation or exaltation.
Indian non-violence, has brought no relief to the cultured
Western powers because it is still poor stuff. Why travel so far
to see its inefficacy ? We in India are torn asunder in spite of
the Congress policy of -non-violence. The Congress itself is dis-
trusted. Not 'until the Congress or a similar group of people
represents the non-violence of the strong, will the world catch
the infection.
India’s aid to Spain and China was merely moral. The mate-
rial aid was but an insignificant token of it.. There is hardly an
Indian who does not feel the same sympathy for Norway and
Denmark who lost their freedom overnight. . Though their case
is different from that of Spain and China, their ruin is more com-
plete perhaps than that 'of Spain and China. Indeed there is a
material difference even between China and Spain. But there is
no difference so far as sympathy is concerned. Pauper India has
nothing to send to these countries except her non-violence. But,
as I have said, this is not yet a sendable commodity. It will be,
when India has gained her freedom' through non-violence.'^
268
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
There then remains Britain’s case. The Congress has caused
no embarrassment. I have declared already thaf I shall do no-
thing to embarrass Great Britain. She will be embarrassed, if
there is anarchy in'., India. That the Congress, so long as it is
under my discipline, will not support.
What the Congress cannot do is to lend its moral influence to
Britain. Moral influence is never mechanically given. It is for
Britain to take it. Perhaps British statesmen do not think the
Congress has any to lend. Perhaps they think that all they need
is material aid in this warring world. If they do, they will not be
f^r wrong. Morality is contraband in war. My correspondent
has given up the whole of his case for Britein when "he says.
■“V/e are not likely to succeed in changing Britain’s heart.”. I do
not wish ill to Britain. I shall grieve if Britain goes down. But
the moral, influence of the Congress cannot avail Britain unless
she washes her hands clean of India. It .works under its own
unalterable condition.
My friend does not -see the difference between my recruiting
in Kheda and my attitude now. During the -last war the moral
issue had not been raised. The Congress was not pledged to non-
violence. It had not the moral hold on the masses it now enjoys.
I was acting' on my own in aU I did. .1 had even attended the
War Conference, And to be true to my, declaration I had been
recruiting at the cost of my health. I. told the peop!^ that, if they
wanted arms, military service was the surest way to get them.
But if they were non-violent like me, my appeal was not to them.
There was no non-violent man among my audiences so far as I
know. Their reluctance was based, on ill-will towards Britain.
This was gradually giving place to an enlightened determination
to throw off the foreign yoke.
Things have changed since then. ' In spite of the unanimous
support that Britain got during the last war from India, the
British attitude was translated into the Rowlatt Act and the
like. The Congress accepted non-violent non-co-operation to
meet the British menace. There is the memory of the JaUianwala
Bagh, the Simon Commission, the Round Table Conferences, the
emasculation of Bengal for the sake of the misdeeds of a few.
The Congress having accepted non-wolence, I do not need to go
to the people to give recruits. Through the Congress I can give
DEMOCRACY AITO NON-VIOLENCE
269
something infinitely better than a few such recruits. Of that evi-
dently Britain has no need. I am willing but helpless.
Sevagram/ 30-4-40
Harijan, 4-5-1940 "
108
DEMOCRACY AND NON-VIOLENCE
Q. Why do you say, “Democracy can only be saved through
non-violence ?” (The questioner is an American friend.)
A. Because democracy, so long as it is sustained by violence
cannot provide for or protect the weak. My notion of demo-
cracy's that under it the weakest should have the same oppor-
tunity as the strongest. -That can never happen except through
non-violence. No cormtry in the world today shows any but
patronizing regard for the weak. The weakest:, you say, go to the
waU. Take your own case. Your land is owr^ed by a few capi-
talist owners. The same is true of South Africa. These large
holdings cannot be sustained except by violence, veiled if not
open. Western democracy, as it functions today, is diluted Nazism
or Fascism. At best it is merely a cloak to hide the Nazi and
the Fascist tendencies of imperiafism. , Why is there the war.to-
day, if it is. not for. the satisfaction of the desire to share the
spoils? It was not through democratic methods that Britain bag-
ged India. What is the meaning of South African democracy?
Its very constitution has been drawn to protect the White man
against the coloxured man, the natural occupant. Your own his-
tory is perhaps blacker still, in spite of what the Northern States
did for the abolition of slavery. The way you have treated the
Negro presents a discreditable record. And it is to save such
democracies that the war is being fought. There is something
very hypocritical about it. I am thinking just now in terms of
non-violence and trying to expose violence in its nakedness.
India is trying to evolve true democracy, i.e. without vio-
lence. Our weapons are those of satyagraha expressed through
the charka, the village industries, primary education through
handicrafts, removal of untouchability, communal harmonyf
270
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAB
C
prohibition, and non-\nolent organization of labour as in
Ahmedabaci These mean mass effort and mass education. We
have big agencies for conducting these acti\dties. They are
purely voluntary, and their only sanction is service of the
lowliest.
• This is the permanent part of the non-violent effort. From
this effort is created the capacity to offer non-\dolent resistance
called non-co-operation and civil disobedience which ma 3 ’^ culmi-
nate in mass refusal to pay rent and taxes. As you know, we
have tried non-co-operation and civil disobedience on a fairly'
large scale and fairly successfully. The experiment has in it
promise of a brilliant future. As yet our resistance has been
that of the weak. The aim is to develop the resistance'of the
strong. Your wars will never ensure safety for democrac 3 \
India’s experiment can and will, if the people come up to the
mark or, to put it another way, if God gives me the necessar 3 "
wisdom and strength to bring the experiment to fruition.
Sevagram, 13-5-40
Harijan, 18-5-1940
109
PANIC
Nowadays one reads about panic in the Press and hears more
than one reads. One friend writes, 'You sitting in lonel 3 ’' Seva-
gram can have no notion of the talks and whispers going on in
the busy cities. Panic has seized them.”
Panic is the most demoralizing state anyone can be in. There
never is any cause for panic. One must keep heart whatever
happens. War is an unmitigated evlL But it certainly does one
good thing, it drives away fear and brings braver 3 ^ to the surface.
Several million lives must have been alread 3 ’' lost betwet^n the
Allies and the Germans. They have been v/asting blood like
water. Old men, women both old and 3 "Oung, and children in
Britain and France are livdng in the midst of imminent death.
But there is no pardc there. If they were seized b 3 ' panic, it
W'ould be an enemy more dreadful than German bullets, bombs
and poison gas. Xet us learn from these suffering nations of the
PANIC
271
West and banish panic from our midst. And in India there is no
cause whatsoever for panic. Britain will die hard and heroically
even if she has to. We may hear of reverses, but we will not
hear of demoralization. Whatever happens will happen in an
orderly manner.
Therefore I would say to those who lend a listening ear to
me : “ Go on with your work or business in the usual way. Do
not withdraw your deposits or make haste to turn your paper into
cash. If you are cautious, you will run no new risks. Your metal
buried underground or in ydur treasure chests need not be con-
sidered safer than in banks or in paper, if anarchy overtakes us.
There is. risk just now in everything. It is best to be as you are
in such a condition. Your steadiness, if it multiplied, will steady
the market. It will be the best preventive against anarchy. There
is undoubtedly fear of goondaism in such times. You must be
prepared to cope with it yourself. Goondas flourish only in the
midst of timid people. They will have no quarter from people
who can defend themselves violently or non-violently. Non-
violent defence presupposes recklessness about one’s life and
property. If it is persisted 'in, it will in the end be a sure cure
for goondaism. But non-violence cannot be learnt in a day. It
requires practice. You can commence to learn it from now.
You must be ready to lose your life or property or both. But
that is implied in the' art of non-violence. If you do not know
how to defend yourself either way, the government will not be
able to save you in spite of its best effort. No government, how-
over powerful it may be, can without the active co-operation of
the people. If even God only helps those who will help them-
selves, how much more true it must be of perishable govern-
ments ! Do not lose nerve and think that tomorrow there will
be no government and it will be all anarchy. You can be the
government now, and you certainly will be in the contingency
yon contemplate or you will perish.”
Sevagram, 4-6-40
Harijan, 8-6-1940
!
HOW TO COMBAT HITLERISM
Whatever Hitler may ultimately prove to be, we know what
Hitlerism has come to mean. It means naked ruthless force re-
duced to an exact science and worked with scientific precision.
In its effect it becomes almost irresistible.
In the early days of satyagraha when it was still known as
passive resistance, The Star of Johannesburg, stirred by the
sight of a* handful of Indians, whoUy imarmed and incapable of
organized violence even if they wished it, pitting themselves
against an overwhelmingly armed government, had a cartoon
in which the latter was depicted as a steam-roller representing
irresistible force, and passive resistance was depicted as an ele-
phant uinnoved and comfortably planting himself in his seat.
This was marked immovable force. The cartoonist had a true
insight into the duel between the irresistible and the immovable
forces. It was then a stalmate. The sequel we know. What
was depicted^ and appeared to be 'irresistible was successfully
resisted by the immovable force of satyagraha — call it suffering
without retaliation.
What became true then can be equally true now. Hitler-
ism will never be defeated by counter-Hitlerism. It can only
breed superior Hitlerism raised to nth degree. What is going
on before our eyes is a demonstration of the utility of violence
as also of Hitlerism.
Let me explain what I mean by failure of Hitlerism. It has:
robbed the small nations of their liberty. It has compelled
France to sue for peace. Probably by the time this is in print
Britain .will have decided upon her course. The fall of France
is enough for my argument. I think French statesmen have
shown rare courage in bowing to the inevitable and refusing to
be party to senseless mutual slaughter. There can be no sense
in France coming out victorious if the stake is in truth lost. The
cause of liberty becomes a^mocke^, if the price to be paid is
wholesale destruction of those who are to enjoy liberty. It
then becomes an inglorious satiation of ambition. The bravery
HOW TO COMBAT HITLERISM
273
of the French soldier is world-known. But let the world know
also the greater bravery of the French statesmen in suing for
peace. I have assumed that the French statesmen have taken
the step in a perfectly honoinrable manner as behoves true sol-
diers. Let me hope that Herr Hitler will impose no hiunihating
terms but show that, though he can fight without mercy, he can
at least conclude peace not without mercy.
But to resume the thread of the argument. What will
Hitler do with his victory ? Can he digest so much power ?
Personally he will go as empty-handed as his not very remote
predecessor Alexander. For the Germans he will have left not
the pleasiure of owning a mighty empire but the burden of sus-
taining its crushing weight. For they will not be able to hold
all the conquered nations in perpetual subjection. And I doubt
if the Germans of future generations will entertain imadulter-
ated pride in the deeds for which Hitlerism will be deemed res-
ponsible. They will honour Herr Hitler as a genius, as a brave
man, a matchless organizer, and much more. But I should hope
that the Germans of the futxure will have learnt the art of dis-
crimination even about their heroes. Anyway I think it will
be allowed that all the blood that has been spilled by Hitler has
added not a millionth part of an inch to the world’s moral
stature.
As against this imagine the state of Europe today if the
Czechs, the Poles, the 'Norwegians, the French and the English
had all said to Hitler : “ You need not make yomr scientific pre-
paration for destruction. We will meet your violence with non-
violence. You wiU, therefore, be able to destroy oirr non-\no-
lent army without tanks, battleships and airships. ” It may be
retorted that the only difference would be that Hitler would
have got without fighting what he has gained after a .bloody
fight.- Exactly. The history of Eiurope would then have been
■written differently. Possession might (but only might) have
been then taken xmder non-violent resistance, as it has been
taken now after perpetration of rmtold barbarities. Under non-
violence only those would have been killed who had trained
themselves to be killed, if need be7 but ■without killing anyone
and "without bearing malice to^wards anybody. 1 dare say that
in that case Eiux>pe would have added several inches.to its moral
18
•274
NON-VIOIS^CE m PEACE AM) WAR
Stature. And in the end I expect it is the moral worth that will
count. All else is dross.
I have 'written these lines for the European Powers. But
they are meant for ourselves. K my argument has gone home,
is it not time for us to declare our changeless faith in non-vio-
lence of the strong and say we do not seek to defend our liberty
with the force of arms, but we will defend it with the force of
non-\dolence ? c
Sevagram, 18-6-40
Harijan, 22-6-1940
111
BOTH HAPPY AND UNHAPPY
It was on the 18th instant that I expressed the following
hope in Harijan :
“If my argument lias gone liome, is it not time for us to
declare our changeless faith in non-violence of the strong and
say we do not seek to defend our liberty with the force of
arms but we 'will defend it -with the force of non-violence ? ”
On the 21st the Working Committee felt unable to enforce
such faith in action when the time for it came. For the Com-
mittee never before had an occasion to test their faith. At
the last meeting they had to lay down a course of action for
meeting impending anarchy wthin and danger of aggression
from 'without.
I pleaded liard 'with the Committee : If you have faith in
non-'vdolence of the strong, now is the time to act up to it. It
‘does not matter that many parties do not belief in non-vio-
lence whether of the strong or of the weak. Probably that »
I is all the greater reason for congressmen to meet the emer-
-gency by non-\dolent action. For if all were non-violent, there
•could be no anarchy and there would be no question jof any-
'body arming for meeting aggression from v/ithout. It is be-
r cause congressmen represent a party of non-violence, in the
Jmidst of parties who do not believe in itf that it becomes
BOTH HAPPY AND UNHAPPY
275
imperative for congressmen to show that they are well able to
act up to their faith.
But the members of the Working Committee felt that con-
gressmen would not be able to act up to it. It would be a new
experience for them. They were never before called upon to
deal with such a crisis. The attempt made by me to form
peace brigades to deal with communal riots and the like had
wholly failed. Therefore they could not hope for the action
contemplated.
My position was different. With the Congress non-vio-
lence was always a policy. It was open to it to reject it if it
' failed. If it could not bring political and economic indepen-
dence, it was of no use. For me non-violence is a creed. I
must act ^up to it whether I am alone s or have companions.
Since propaganda of non-violence is the mission of my life, I
must pursue it in all weathers. I felt that now was the time
for me to prove my faith before God and man. And so I asked
for absolution from the Committee. Hitherto I have been res-
ponsible for guiding the general policy of the'^Congress. I could
no longer do so when fundamental differences were discovered
between them and me. They readily recognized the correct-
ness of my attitude. And they gave me the absolution. Once
more they have justified the trust imposed in them. They have
been true to themselves. They had not the confidence in them-
'selves or those whom they represented, that they could express
in their actions the required measure of non-violence, ^nd so
they made the only choice they could honestly make. It was
a tremendous sacrifice they made — the sacrifice of the prestige
that the Congress had gained in the world for unadulterated
non-violence, and the dissolution of the unwritten and unspoken
bond between them and me. But though it is a break in the
common practice of a common ideal or policy, there is no break
in the friendship of over twenty years' standing.
I am both happy and unhappy over the result. Happy be-
cause I have been able to bear the strain of the break and have
been given the strength to stand alone. Unhappy because my
word seemed to lose the power to- carry with me those whom
it was my proud privilege to carry all these many years which
seem like yesterday. But I know that, if God shows me the
276
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND VTAR
way to demonstrate the emcacy of non-violence of the strcng,
the break will prove to have been temporary. If there is no
way, they will have justiSed their wisdom in bearing the
wrench of letting me go my way alone. If that tragic discover^"
of my impotence is in store for me, I hope stilly to retain the
feith that has sustained me all these years and to have h imili ty
enough to realize that I was not fit enou^ instrument to earn"
the torch of non-violaice any further.
But this argument and doubt are based m>on the assump-
tion that the members of the Working Comroittee represent the
feeling of the vast majorily of congressmeru They would wi^
and I hope, that the vast majority of congressmen had in them
the non-violence of the strong. Ivo one vrould be more glad
than they to discover that th^ had underrated congressmen’s
strength. The probability, however, is that there is no majo-
rity but only a good minority which represents the non-wolence
of the strong. It should be remembered that the matter does
not lend itself to argument. The members of the Working
Committee had all the argument before them. But non-vio-
lence which is a quality of the heart, cannot come by an appeal
to the brain. Therefore what is required is a quiet but resolute
demonstration of non-violent strength. The opportunity comes
to everyone almost daily. There are communal clashes, there
are dacoities, there are wordy duels. In ail these things those
who are truly non-violent can and will demonstrate it If it is
shown in an adequate measure it will not fail to infect their
surroundings. I am quite clear that there is not a single con-
gressman who disbelieves in the eScacy of non-violence out of
sheer cussedness. Xret the congressmen who believe that the
Congress should adhere to non-violence in dealing with internal
disorders or external aggression, express it in their daily con-
duct Non-violence of the strong caimot be a mere policy. It
must be a creed, or a passion, if ‘ creed ’ is objected to. A man
with a passion expresses it in every little act of his. Therefore
he who is possessed by non-violence will express it in the family
circle, in his dealings with neighbours, in his business, in Con-
gress meetings, in public meetings, and in his dealings with op-
ponents. It is because it has not expressed itself in this vray
among congressmen that the members of the VTorking Com-
BOTH HAPPY AND UNHAPPY
277
mittee rightly concluded that congressmen were not ready for
non-violent treatment of internal disorders or external aggres-
sion. Embarrassment caused by non-violent action would move
established authority to yield to popular will. But such action
has obviously no play in the face of disorders. We have to court
death without retaliation and with no malice or anger towards
those who bring about disorder. It is easy enough to see that
non-violence required here is of a wholly different type from
what the Congress has known hitherto. But it is the only non-
violence' that is true and that can save the world from self-des-
truction. This is a certainty sooner or later, sooner rather than
later, if India cannot deliver the message of true non-violence
to a world which wants to be saved from the curse of wars and
does not know how to find the deliverance.
Sevagram, 24-6-40 ^
P.S . — 1 After the foregoing was written and typed, I saw
Pandit Jawaharlal’s statement. His love for and confidence in
me peep out of every sentence referring to me. The foregoing
does not need any amendment. It is better for the reader to
have both the independent reactions. Good must come out of
this separation.
Harijan, 29-6-1940 •
112
WHAT TO DO ?
Q. The situation in the country is becoming graver daily*.
Everywhere panic is growing. In certain parts armed gangs
are already organizing themselves to take advantage of the
ensuing anarchy in case the central power should disintegrate
or weaken. The danger may not be imminent, but it would be
folly to ignore its possibility. With all the education in non-
\dolence which the coimtry has received during the last twenty
years, you will agree that it has not developed the sort’ of non-
violence that can be effective in the face of anarchy and gang-
sterism. The government is taking steps to organize the citizens
for self-defepce. What is the duty of those who look up to you
for lead and guidance ? Should they take part in these govern-
ment activities ? If they should not, what else are dhey to do ?
Surely they cannot sit with folded hands doing nothing.
A. I am unable to say what the Congress will exactly do, in
view of the recent statement of the Working Committee. If
you believe in non-violent treatment of anarchy and the like,
naturally you will prepare yourself and your neighbours and
those whom you can influence for non-violent defence. I quite
agree with you that no responsible person can sit idly by in
these times. Violent preparation would need long previous
training. Non-violent preparation means mental adjustment.
Possibility of anarchy there undoubtedly is. But if you are non-
violent, you will not give way to fear. Do not anticipate anarchy
just as you do not anticipate death though you know that it is
a certainty. If you are non-violent, you \vill believe that there
will be no anarchy. But if unfortunately it comes, you and
your companions or followers will give your lives to prevent it.
Those who give their lives in trying to kill those whom they
regard as robbers or mischief-makers, do no better, possibly they
do worse. They risk their lives, and there is darkness after they
are gone. What is more, they may leave things worse by feed-
ing the fire of violence by counter-violence. Those who die
unresistingly are likely to still the fury of violence by their
278
A VITAL QUESTION
279
wholly innocent sacrifice. But this truly non-violent action is
not possible unless it springs from a heart belief that he whom
you fear and regard as a robber, dacoit, or worse, and you are
one, and that therefore, it is better that you die at his hands
than that he, your ignorant brother, should die at yours.
Sevagram, 24-6-40
Harijan, 29-6-1940 '' ’
113
I
A VITAL QUESTION
The next question for consideration is that of providing for,
internal disorder and external invasion. The raising of private
armies will be worse than useless. It will never be allowed.
No power, whether foreign or Swadeshi, can tolerate private
armies. Those, therefore, who believe in the necessity of India
having armed forces will be driven sooner or later to enlist them-
selves mider the British banner. It is the logical outcome of the
belief.. The Working Committee have taken the decision on the
point. If it is to abide, I haVe little doubt that they will pre-
sently have to advise congressmen to enlist in the usual way.
That, would mean an end to the slogan of immediate indepen-
' dence and an end also to -non-violence of the true brand. I shall
hope to the, last that, for the sake of themselves, India, aye Bri-
tain herself, and humanity, congressmen will resolutely decline
to have anything to do with the use of arms for any of the two
purposes. I feel' strongly that the future of humanity lies in the
hands of the Congress. May God give wisdom and courage
to congressmen to take the right step.’'' , -
New Delhi, 1-7-40
Harijan, 6-7-1940
* From an article entitled ‘Some Vital Questions’.
114
TO EVERY BRITON
t _
In 1896 I addressed an appeal to every Briton in South
Africa on behalf of my countrymen who had gone there ^
labourers or traders and their assistants. It had its effect. How-
ever important it was from my viewpoint, the cause which I
pleaded theh was insignificant compared with the cause which
prompts this appeal, I appeal to every Briton, wherever he may
be now, to accept the method of non-violence instead of that of
war, for the adjustment of relations between nations and other
matters, Yoim statesmen have declared that this is a war on
behalf of democracy. There are many other reasons given in
justification. You know them all by heart, I suggest that, at
the end of the war, whichever way 4t ends, there will be no
democracy left to represent democracy. This war has descended
upon mankind as a curse and a warning. It is a curse inasmuch
as it is brutalizing man on a scale hitherto unknown. All dis-
tinctions between combatants and non-combatants have been
abolished. No one and nothing is to be spared. Lying has
been reduced to an art. Britain was to defend small nationali-
ties. One by one they have vanished, at least for the time
being. It is also a warning. It is a warning that, if nobody
reads the writing on the wall, man will be reduced to the state
of the beast, whom he is shaming by his maimers. I read the
writing when the hostilities broke ^out. But I had not the
courage to say the word. God has given me the courage to say
it before it is too late.
I appeal for cessation of hostilities, not because you are too
exhausted to fight, but because war is bad in essence. You
want to kill Nazism. You will never kill it by its indifferent
adoption. Your soldiers are doing the same work of destruction
as the Germans. The only difference is that perhaps yours are
not as thorough as the Germans. If that be so, yours will soon
acquire the same thoroughness as theirs, if not much greater.
On no other condition can you win the war. In other words,
you will have to be more ruthless than the Nazis. No cause.
280
TO EVERY BRITON
281
however just, can warrant the indiscriminate slaughter that is
going on minute by minute. I suggest that a cause that demands
the inhumanities that are being perpetrated today cannot be
called just.
I do not want Britain to be defeated, nor do I want her to
be victorious in a trial of brute strength, whether expressed
through the muscle or the brain. Your muscular bravery is an
established fact. Need you demonstrate that your brain is also
as unrivalled in destructive power as your muscle ? I hope you
do not wish to enter into such an undignified competition with
the Nazis. I venture to present you with a nobler and a braver
way, worthy of the bravest soldier. I want you to fight Nazism
without arms, or, if I am to retain (the military tenninology,
with non-violent arms. I would like you to lay down the arms
you have as being useless for saving you or hiimanity. You
will invite Herr Hitler and Signor Mussolini to take what they
want of the coimtries you caU your possessions. Let them take
possession of your beautiful island,’ with your many beautiful
buildings. You will give all these but neither your souls, nor
your minds. If these gentlemen choose to occupy your homes,
you will vacate them. If they do not give you free passage out,
you will allow yourselves man, woman and child, to be
slaughtered, but you will refuse to owe allegiance to them.
This process or method, which I have called non-violent
non-co-operation, is not without considerable success in its use
in India. Your representatives in India may deny my claim. If
they do, I shall feel sorry for them. They may tell you that bur
non-co-operation was not wholly non-violent, that it was bom
of hatred. If they give that testimony, I will not deny it. Had
it been wholly non-violent, if all the non-co-operators had been
filled with , goodwill towards you, I make bold to say that you
who are India’s masters would have become her pupils and,
wi^h much greater skill than we have, perfected this matchless
weapon and met the German and Italian friends’ menace with
it. Indeed the history of Europe during the past few months
would then have been written differently. Europe would have
been spared seas of innocent blood, the rape of so many small
nations, and the orgy of hatred.
This is no appeal made by a man who does not know his
business. I have been practising with scientific precision non-
282
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
violence and its possibilities for an unbroken period of over fifty
years. I have applied it in every walk of life, domestic, instil
tutional, economic and politicaL I know of no single case in
which it has failed. Where it has seemed sometimes to have
failed, I have ascribed it to my imperfections. I claim no per-
fection for myself. But I do claim to be a passionate seeker
after Truth, which is but another name for God. In the course
of that search the discovery of non-violence came to me. Its
spread is my life mission. I have no interest in living except for
the prosecution of that mission.
I claim to have been a lifelong and wholly disinterested
friend of the British people. At one time I used to be also a
lover of your empire. I thought that it*was doing good to India.
When I saw that in the nature of things it could do no good, I
used, and am still using, the non-violent method to fight impe-
rialisuL Whatever the ultimate fate of my country, my love for
you remains, and will remain, imdiminished. My non-violence
demands universal love, and you are not a small part of it. It
is that love which has prompted my appeal to you.
May God give power to every word of mine. In His name
I began to write this, and in His name I close it. May your
statesmen have the %visdom and courage to respond to my
appeal. I am telling His Excellency the Viceroy that my ser-
vices are at the disposal of His Majesty’s Government, should
they consider them of any practical use in advancing the object
of my appeal.
New Delhi, 2-7-40
Harijan^ 6-7-1940
115
“A CRY IN THE WILDERNESS” ?
^ SW: ^ II
"With hands upraised I cry:
(But none listens to me)
Dhannai yields both Artha^ and Kama3 ;
Why is that Dharma not observed ? "
Bapuji Aney on his way back "from Simla paid a flying visit
to me at Delhi on Saturday. Whether we work together or seem
to be working in opposite directions, his love for me endures,
and so he never misses an opportunity to look in wherever I may
be. He expresses himself freely before me, and often shares with /
me a verse or two from his inexhaustible store. During his
Delhi visit he sympathized with me for my having had to sever
my connection with the Congress, but he really congratulated
me. “ They should, I think, leave you in peace,” he said, “ and
let you go your way. I read your appeal to every Briton. It
v/ill fall on deaf ears. But that does not matter to you. You
cannot help telling them what you feel to be their Dharma
(Duty). But it is not strange that they will not listen to you — ‘
seeing that the Congress itself did not listen to you at the critical
moment. When even Sage Vyasa failed to make himself heard,
how should others fare better ? He had to conclude his great
epic — Mahabharata — with ^ verse which reveals the cry of his
souL” With this he cited the verse I have quoted at the head
of this article. He thereby strengthened my faith, and ajso
showed how difficult was the way I had chosen.
And yet it has never seemed to me so difficult as it is
imagined to be, Thou^ the Sardar’s way and mine seem to
diverge today, it does not mean that our hearts also diverge.
It was in my power to stop him from seceding from me. But it
did not seem to be proper to do so. And it would have been
morally wrong to strive with Rajaji in what he firmly regarded
-- 1 Duty
2 Wealth
3 Desire, aspiration
288
284
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
as his clear duty. Instead, therefore, of dissuading Rajaji I
ericouraged him to follow his course. It was my clear duty to do
so. If I have the power to carry my experiment of dhimsa to
success in an apparently new field, if my faith endures, and
if I am right in thinking that the masses are fundamentally non-
violent, Rajaji and the Sardar will again be with me as before.
What are these apparently new fields for the operation of
non-violence ? Those who have followed the Working Com-
mittee’s resolutions and writings in Harijan are now familiar
with these. Non-violence in ,its operation against constituted
authority is one field. We have exercised this up to now with
a fair amount of success, and I have always described it as the
non-violence of the weak. This non-violence may be said to
have come to stay with congressmen.
The other field is the exercise of ahiTnsa in internal disturb-
ances — Hindu-Muslim riots and the like^ We have not been able
to show visible success in the exercise of ahimsa in this field.
What then should the congressmen do when internal chaos is
so imininent ? Will they return blow for blow, or will they
cheerfully bend their heads to receive violent blows ? The
answer to this is not so easy as we might think. Instead of going
into the intricacies, I should say that congressmen should try
to save the situation by laying down their lives, not by taking
any. He who meets death without striking a blow fulfils his
duty cent per cent.* The result is in God’s hands.
But it is clear that this non-violence is not the non-violence
of the weak. It does not give one the joy of jail-going. One
can have that joy and also cover thereby the ill-will one har-
bours in his, breast against the government. One can also non-
co-operate with the government. But where swords, knives,
lathis and stones are freely used, what is a man to do single-
handed ? Is it possible for one" to receive these deadly blows
with ill-will in ‘one’s heart ? It is clear that it is impossible to
do so, unless one is saturated with charity. It is only he who
feels one with his opponent that can receive his blows as though
they were so many flowers. Even one such man, if God favours
him, can do the work of a thousand. It requires soul force —
moral courage — of the highest type.
The man or woman who can display this non-violence of
the brave can easily stand against external invasion. This is
“ A CRY IN THE WILDERNESS ” ?
285
the third field for the exercise of non-violence. The Congress
Working Committee were of opinion that, while it might be
possible for us to exercise ahimsa in internal disturbances,
India has not the strength to exercise ahimsa against the inva-
sion of a foreign foe. This their want of faith has distressed
me. I do not believe that the imarmed millions of India cannot
exercise ahimsa with success in this wide field. It is for con-
gressmen to reassure the Sardar, whose faith in ahimsa of the
strong has for the moment been shaken, that ahimsa is the only
weapon that can suit India in the fields mentioned. Let no one
ask, “ But what about the martial races in India ?” For me that
is all the more reason why congressmen should train themselves
to defend their country with a non-violent army. This is an
entirely new experiment. But who, save the Congress^-is to try
it — the Congress which has tried it successfully in one field ? It
is my unshakable faith that, if we have a sufficient number of
non-violent soldiers, we are sure to succeed even in this new
field, apart from the saving of the needless waste of crbres of
rupees.
I am therefore hoping that all Gujarati Congressites — men
and women — will declare their adherence to ahimsa and re-
assure the Sardar that they will never resort to violence. Even
if there is sure hope of success in the exercise of violence, they
will not prefer it to the exercise of non-violence. We are sure to
learn by our mistakes, “ We fall to rise, are baffled to fight better,
sleep to wake.”
On the train to Wardha, 7-7-40
Harijan, 13-7-1940
116
THE DELHI RESOLUTION
I have just seen the news that the Working Committee’s
fateful resolution has been released to the Press. It was passed
in my presence, but I wanted to say nothing before it was
actually released for publication. It will be a profound mistake
to suppose that the members passed the five solid days in
wrangling. They had to discharge a heavy responsibility.
Though logically the resolution is no departure from the Ram-
garh resolution, it is an undoubted departure from its spirit. The
letter often remains constant, the spirit changes. Up to now,
for one reason or another, the Congress policy was ; no partici-
pation in the war except for the moral influence that the Con-
gress can exercise, if the vital demand was satisfied of Britain's
own free will. Such was not the position of all the members
of the Working Committee. Hence at the critical moment every
member had to make up his or her mind independently of the
rest. The five days were days of tremendous heart-searching. I
had produced a draft resolution, which almost all thought was
the best, ii they could bring to bear a living belief in non-
violence through and through, or if they could truthfully say
that such was the belief of their constituencies. Some had
neither, and some had individually the required faith. Only
Khan Saheb was clear so far as his own faith and that of his^
beloved Khudai Khidmatgars were concerned. So he had
decided even after Hhe last Wardha resolution that he had no
place in the Congress. He had a special mission and a special
duty to his followers. So the Working Committee gladly permitted
him to retire from the Congress. By retiring he serves the Con-
gress all the more, even as I hope to do. Who knows that those
of us, who retire, may not be able to give our comrades the faith
they seem, for the moment, to have lost ?
Rajaji was the framer of the resolution. He was as certain
of his position as I was of mine. His persistency, courage and
utter huxnility brought him converts. Sardar Patel was his
greatest* prize. He would "hot have even thought of bringing
286
THE DELHI RESOLUTION
287
tip his resolution, if I had chosen to prevent him. But I give my
comrades the same credit for earnestness and self-confidence
that I claim for myself. I had long known that we were drifting
away from each other in our outlook upon the political prob-
lems that face us. He will not allow me to say that his is a depar-
ture from ahimsa. He claims that his very akimsa has led him
to the point which culminated in his resolution. He thinks that
I suffer from obsession owing to too much brooding on ahimsa.
He almost thinks that my vision is blurred. It was no use my
returning the compliment, though half joking I did. I have no
proof, save my faith, to question his coxmter faith. That is
evidently absurd. I could not carry the Committee with me at
Wardha and so I got my absolution. I at once saw as clear as
daylight that, if my position was not acceptable, Rajaji’s was
the only real alternative. I therefore encouraged him to persist in
his effort, though all the while I held him to be hopelessly in
Ihe v/rong. And by exemplary patience, skill and considerate-
ness towards his opponents he got a good majority, five remain-
ing neutral. I had a fearful moment. Generally such resolu-
tions are not carried by the majority vote. But at this juncture
xmanimity was not to be expected. I advised that Rajaji’s reso-
lution should be enforced. And so at the last moment the
Committee decided that the resolution should go forth to the
world.
It was necessary for the public to have this background to
the tremendous step the Committee have taken for good' or ill.
Those Congressmen who have a living faith in the ^non-violence
of the strong will naturally abstain. For the moment, however,
what they can do is wholly irrelevant. Rajaji’s resolution repre-
sents the considered policy of the Congress. Non-congressmen,
who were eager for the Congress to be free of my religious Jjias
to adopt a" purely political attitude, should welcome the reso-
lution and support it wholeheartedly. So should the , Muslim
League, and even the Princes who think of India more than their
principalities.
The British government have to make their choice. Inde-
pendence they cannot withhold unless their wisdom is as much
blurred as Rajaji claims that mine is. If independence is recog-
nized, the acceptance of the other part of the resolution follows
as a matter of course. The question is : do they want to impress
288
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
help from India by virtue of their rulership over India, or will
they have help that a free and independent India can give ? My
individual advice has already gone. My help always has been
promised. Acceptance of that advice can but enhance their
heroism. But if they cannot accept it, I advise, as a disinterested
but staunch friend, that the British government should not reject
the hand of friendship offered by the Congress.
Sevagram, 8-7-40
Harijan, 13-7-1940
/
117
BEFORE THE GANDHI SEVA SANGH
If the Bank and File Believe '
But if the Working Committee were, wrong in their assump-
tion that the rank and file have lost their belief in non-violence
and that they cannot come up to the scratch in times of crisis,
the rank and file have to reassure the Working Committee.
That is what Gandhiji said, with special reference to the
Gujaratis, in his article last week. He explained the whole
thing at much greater length to the joint meeting of the Gandhi
Seva Sangh and the Charkha Sangh held soon after the Wardha
meeting of the Working Committee. “Now is the testing time
for you,” h^ said. “ The Working Committ^, let us say, were
weighed and found wanting. Can the Gandhi Seva Sangh do
anything to repair their failure ? The Working Committee’s
resolution does not mean that you cannot appeal to people to
declare their faith in non-violence. You can do so, and then
tell the members of the Working Committee, ‘ You undervalued
our faith. We are going to hold by the creed.’ I tell you the
Working Committee members will not only not resent this, but
will simply dance with joy. Some of you are members of the
Congress. It is the duty of those who are members and who
believe in non-violence to reassure the members of the Working
Committee, to declare their faith before the meeting of the
A. I. C. C,, and even before the open Congress, if the time comes.
BEFORE THE GANDHI SEVA SANGH
289
But you may not separate your creed as congressmen and creed
as ordinary human beings, your behaviour in Congress affairs
and in non-Congress affairs. Your non-violence, if it is true,
must be part of your normal life, must be in your thought, word
and deed, and must colour all your behaviour. Then and then
only can you give the Working Committee the assurance I have
referred io, and compel them to alter their resolution.”
The Test of Gentiineness
“;!ut,” he added, “let me explain this further. You will
examine every action of yours in the light of the creed. That
does not mean that you will be morbid or pernickety. Your
conduct will have to be natural. When I began observing
silence it meant an effort on my part. Now it has become part
of my nattme, and to break my silence means an effort. In the
same way acting non-violently must be part of your nature.
It is hkely that your relating everything to non-violence may be
logically wrong, but it is not wrong for you. I may be wrong,
in the eyes of others, in my belief that with every thread that I
draw I am bringing Swaraj nearer, but for me the belief is as
true as the fact that I exist. That saves me from losing my
sanity. This spinning wheel is a symbol of non-violence for me.
The wheel as such is lifeless, but when I invest it with symbol-
ism it becomes a living thing for me. Its soimd, if it is musical,
is in tune with non-violence. If it is unmusical, it is not in tune
with it, for it indicates carelessness on my part. The steel spindle
one can use as a deadly weapon, but we have put it there for
the best possible use. So we have to be meticulously careful
about every part of the wheel. Then and then only will it pro-
duce fine music and spinning will be a true sacrificial act.
“ But this kind of sadhana, you will say, may take thousands
of years. It may take some a thousand years, and it may take
some others only one year. Don’t think that, if in spite of my
50 years’ practice of it I am still imperfect, it must take you
many more years. No, there is no rule of three here. You may
succeed quicker than I. I meant what I said to Prithwisingh :
. ‘ You had at any rate the violence of the brave. I had nothing
of it. . Now if you .believe in cultivating non-violence of the
b»ave, you will do so much more quickly than I, and you will
leave me behind.’ This applies to every one ofwou. In South
N. V.-10
290 NON-VTOUaNCE IN PEACE AND WAR,
Africa I was the first to learn shoemaking, and so I taught it to
others. But those others soon'left me behind. It was because I
was a true teacher. Now if I am a true teacher of ahitnsa, I. am
sure you will soon leave behind your teacher. If that does not
happen, it will only mean that I was an unfit teacher. But if
my teaching fructifies, there will be teachers^of ahimsa in every
home.
“I want to know how many of you are with me. If none
goes with me, I am ready to tread my path alone. For I know
that I can never be alone as God is there with me. You are all
companion sadhaks (seekers) with me. I am old, but you have
many years before you. And yet let me tell you that I do not
feel the weight of my years. I do not think my power of growth
or capacity for research has come to an end.
“ So you have to go forth and find out how many actual
believers in ahimsa there are among congressmen. The Work-
ing Committee members are your representatives. If they were
mistaken in assessing the faith of their electors, you have to
correct their judgment. My position was different from theirs.
I consider myself a confirmed representative of ahimsa and so
I severed my connection with the Congress in 1934. I could not
help doing it. If I had not done so, I should have been untrue
to my creed.
“No one knows my imperfections better than I, but what
little power I possess is derived from my ahimsa. What is it but
my ahimsa that draws thousands of women to me in fearless
confidence ? But neither you nor I can trade on our capital.
We have to be up and doing every moment of our lives, and go
forward in our sadhana. We have to live and move and have
our being in ahimsa even as Hitler does in himsa. It is the faith
and perseverance and single-mindedness with which he has per-
fected his weapons of destruction that commands my admira-
tion. That he uses them as a monster is immaterial for our pur-
pose. We have to bring to bear the same single-mindedness and
perseverance in evolving our ahimsa. Hitler is awake all the 24
hours of the day in perfecting his sadhana. He -wins because
he pays the price. His inventions surprise his enemies. But it
is his single-minded devotion to his purpose that should be the
object of our admiration and emulation. Although he works all
his waking hours, his intellect is imclouded and unerring. Are
our intellects unclouded and unerring ? A mere belief in ahimsa
BEFORE THE GANDHI SEVA SANGH
291
or the charkha will not do. It should be intelligent and creative.
If intellect plays a large part in the field of violence, I hold that
it plays a larger part in the field of non-violence.”
With this he referred to the work of Richard Gregg in this
direction, and described how the latter had come to the conclu-
sion that spinning as a symbol of non-violence is good enough
not only for India but for the world.
Continuing he said : “ The Working Committee’s decision
was simply an echo of the atmosphere around them. My deci-
sion could not be its echo. For ahimsa is my special sadJiana,
not that of the Congress. I congratulate the members on their
honesty and their courage, though I am sorry for myseK that I
could not inspire them with confidence in our creed and in my
leadership. We have now to show that we have faith in the
non-violence of the brave. It does not mean the development
of the capacity to go to jail. It means increasing fmth in the
potency of constructive work to bring about Swaraj, ^nd in
constructive work being a vital part of the programme of
ahimsa."
Why an Imperfect Man Chosen ?
To those who have been saying that, if Gandhiji has failed
in perfecting his ahimsa, failure is certain in. their case, he had
already given the answer. But in the concluding part of the
speech he presented another aspect of his imperfection. He
said : “ In placing civil disobedience before constructive work
I was wrong, and I did not profit by the Himalayan blunder
that I had committed. I feared that I should estrange my co-
workers, and so carried on with imperfect ahimsa. But I am not
sorry for my blunders. My imperfections and failures are as
much a blessing from God as my successes and my talents, and
I lay them both at His feet. Why should He have* chosen me, an
imperfect instrument, for such a mighty experiment ? I think
He deliberately did so. He had to serve the poor dumb ignorant
millions. A perfect man might have been their despair. When
they found that one with their failings was marching on towards
ahimsa, they too had confidence in their own capacity. We
should not have recognized a perfect man if he had come as our
leader, and we might have driven him to a cave. Maybe he who
follows me ^vill be more perfect and you will be able to receive
292
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
his message. Maybe some one of you may be that perfect teacher
who is to come.’’
An Impossible Ideal ?
But are we not being driven to philosophical anarchism?
Is that not an impossible ideal ? These questions were asked
by a philosophic friend some months ago, and Gandhiji gave
him replies which I think will be useful today.
‘‘ Does anyone know true non-violence ?” he asked.
Gandhiji immediately rephed : “ Nobody knows it, for
nobody can practise perfect non-violence.”
“ Then how can it be used in politics ?” ^
“ It can be used in politics precisely as it can be used in the
domestic sphere. We may not be perfect in our use of it, but
we definitely discard the Xisp of violence, and grow from failure
to success.”
^‘You would govern non-violently. But all legislation is
violence.”
“No, not all legislation.. Legislation imposed by people
upon themselves is non-violence to the extent it is possible in
society. A society organized and run on the basis of complete
non-violence would be the purest anarchy.”
“ Do you think it is a realizable ideal ?”
“Yes. It is realizable to the extent non-violence is realiz-
able. That State is perfect and non-violent where the people are
governed the least. The nearest approach to purest anarchy
would be a democracy based on non-violence. The European
democracies are to my mind a negation of democracy.”
“Do ‘you think that non-violence of the democracy which
you visualize was ever realized in the olden times ?”
“ I do not know. But if it was not, it only means that we
had never noade the attempt to realize the highest in us. I have
no doubt in my mind that at some stage we .were wiser, and that
we have to grow wiser than we are tod^ in order to find what '
beauties are hidden in human nature. Perfect non-violence is
impossible so long as we exist physically, for we would want
some space at least to occupy. Perfect non-\dolence whilst you
are inhabiting the body is only a theory like Euclid’s point or
straight line, but we have to endeavour every moment of our
lives.”
Sevagram, 15-7-40
Harijan, 21-7-1940
M. D.
118
THE CORRESPONDENCE
The following correspondence between Gandhiji and His
Excellency the Viceroy is released for publication :
Gandhiji’s letter to Lord Linlithgow dated Delhi, July 3 :
“ You must have seen in the Press my public appeal to every
Briton. Nevertheless, for the sake of courtesy, I enclose here-
with a copy. You will note the last sentence of my appeal. Will
you please convey the contents of it to the proper quarters ?
The appeal and the -offer at the end represent my personal and
humble contribution to Britain’s cause. It is the best I could
give.”
Lord Linlithgow’s letter to Gandhiji dated Simla, July 10 :
“ I duly conveyed your letter of July 3 and your appeal to
His Majesty’s Government. I have now heard from them that
with every appreciation of your motives they do' not feel that
the policy which you advocate is one which it is possible for
them to consider, since in common -with the whole empire they
are firmly resolved to prosecute the war to a victorious
conclusion.”
Harijan, 21-7-1940
293
119
UNREPENTANT
By writing that ‘Appeal to Every Briton’ I have invited
upon my head an extra load of work which without God’s help
I would be ill able to bear. If it is His will that I should shoulder
it, He will give me the strength to carry on.
When I decided to confine myself mostly to writing in
Gujarati or Hindustani, I had no notion that I would have to
write the appeal. It came to me like a flash, and the courage
to write it came with it. I had resisted tiU then all pressure
from Enghsh and American friends to give guidance. But I
could not see my way. Now having addressed that appeal, I
must follow up the reactions to it. A large amount of corres-
pondence is pouring in upon me. Save for one angry telegram,
I had nothing but friendly criticism from Englishmen and even
appreciation from some.
I was grateful to H. E. the Viceroy for forwarding my offer
to His Majesty’s Government. The correspondence with regard
to it the readers have already seen or will see in this issue.
Though no better response to the appeal was to be expected, I
cannot help saying that it was the knowledge of the determina-
tion to carry the war to a victorious end that had prompted my
appeal. No doubt the determination is natural and worthy of
the best British tradition. Nevertheless the awful slaughter
that the determination involves, should induce a search for a
better and braver way to achieve the end. For peace has its
victories more glorious than those of war. The non-violent
method would have meant no abject surrender. It would have
confounded all modem tactics of war, indeed rendered them of
no use. The new world order, which all dream of, would surely
have been found. I hold a new order to be impossible, if the war
is fought to a finish or mutual exhaustion leads to a patched-up
peace.
Let me, therefore, examine the argument advanced in a
letter received from a friend. Here it is :
**Two English friends, who admire you, say your appeal to
every Briton cannot have any effect just note. It is impossible
294
UNREPENTANT
295
to expect the man in the street to do a complete volte face with
any degree of understanding — indeed it is impossible for the
understanding to do, as you say, without a heart-'oeliet in non-
violence. The time to mould a new world on your lines will be
after the war. They realize your way is the right one, but they
say it needs endless preparation and instruction and hig leader-
ship — none of which they possess. Regarding India they say
the attitude of the present authority is deplorable. Long ago
India should have been declared as independent as Canada, and
her people should be allowed to work out their own constitution.
But what they are extremely perplexed about now is that you
want absolute Independence straightaway, and the next step
you will take is ‘ no further help to Britain in the prosecution
of war, surrender to Germany, and opposition to her by non-
violent means.’ You must explain what you mean in more detail
so as to remove this misunderstanding. This is an honest
reaction.”
The appeal was intended to produce the effect now. It
could not come out of the mathematical calculation. If the
conviction could have come, action was an easy matter. The
mass mind responds under pressure. That the appeal has not
produced the intended result shows that either my word has no
power or that God has a purpose of which we have no know-
ledge. The appeal has come from an anguished heart. I could
not suppress it. It was not written for the moment. I am
quite sure that it enunciates a truth of eternal value.
If the ground is not prepared from now, there may be no
time left after a dismal termination of the war for evolving a
new order. Whatever the order, it wiU be in response to a
conscious or imconscious effort from now. Indeed the effort
began before my appeal. I hope that it has stimulated it, per-
haps given it a definite direction. I suggest to the non-official
leaders -and moulders of British opinion, if they are convinced
of the truth of my position, to work for its adoption. Compared
to the big issue raised in my appeal, the question of Indian inde-
pendence pales into insignificance. But I -hold with the two
Englishmen that the British Government’s attitude is deplorable.
The two friends are wholly wrong in the deduction they have
drawn from the assumed recognition of India’s independence.
They forget that I am out of the picture. Those who are respon-
sible for the Working Committee’s last resolution have meant
296
NON-VIOIiENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
free India’s co-operation with Britain. With them, there is no
question of surrender to Germany or non-violent opposition.'
But I must not here tariy^ on Indian independence and its
implications, tempting though the subject is.
The cuttings and correspondence before me say that the
Congress rejection of my advice to abstain from preparation for
military defence of India precludes me from making the appeal
to Britain or from expecting a favourable response. The argu-
ment is plausible, but only plausible. The critics say that, i£ I
have failed with my people, I have no right to expect Britain
whilst she is in the midst of a life and death struggle to listen to
me. I am a man with a mission, India’s millions have never
tasted the bitters of war as the British have. Britain, if she is
to fulfil her declared purpose, needs a radical change in her
policy. I feel that I know the change that is needed. My
inability to persuade the Working Committee is irrelevant to
the theme under discussion.- There is no analogy between
India’s case and Britain’s. I am, therefore, wholly unrepentant.
I maintain that in issuing my appeal I have acted wholly as a
lifelong friend of Britain.
A writer, however, retorts : “ Address your appeal to Hitler.”
In the first place, I did write to Herr Hitler. My letter was pub-
lished in the Press some time after I addressed it. In the second
place, there can be no meaning in my appeal to Herr Hitler to
adopt non-violence. He is marching from victory to victory. I
can only appeal to him to desist. That I have 'done. But to Bri-
tain, which is just now on the defensive, 1 can present the
really effective weapon of non-yiolent non-co-operation. Let m}’' *
method be rejected on merits, not by bringing inapt analogies
or imtenable argument. The issue raised by me, I venture to
think, is of imiversal importance. The usefulness of non-
violent method seems to be granted by all the critics.' They
gratuitously assume the impossibility of human nature, as it is
constituted, responding to the strain involved in non-violent
preparation. But that is begging the question. I say, ‘‘You
have never tried the method on any scale. In so far as it has
been tried, it has shown promising results.”
Sevagram, 17-7-40 ^
Harijan, 21-7-1940
120
KHANSAHEB’S AHIMSA
In the storm that shook most of the members of the Worldng
Committee, Khansaheb Abdul Gaffar Khan stood firm as a rock.
He had never any doubt about his position, and his statement,
which I reproduce below, should serve as a beacon light to all
of us :
Some recent resolutions of the Congress Working Commit-
tee indicate that they are restricting the use of non-violence
to the fight for India’s freedom against constituted authority.
How far and in what manner this will have to be applied in
the future I cannot say. The near future will perhaps, throw
light on this. Meanwhile it is difficult for me to continue in
the Congress Working Committee, and I am resigning from it.
I should like to make it clear that the non-violence I have
believed in and preached to my brethren of the Khudai Khid-
matgars is much wider. It affects all our life, and only this
has permanent value. Unless we learn this lesson of non-
violence fully, we shall never do away with the deadly feuds
which have been the curse of the people of the Frontier. Since
we took to non-violence and the Khudai Khidmatgars pledged
themselves to it, we have largely succeeded in ending these
feuds. Non-violence has added greatly to the courage of the
Pathans. Because they were previously addicted to violence
far more than others, they have profited by non-violence much
more. We shall never really and effectively defend ourselves •
except through non-violence. Khudai Khidmatgars must, there-
fore, be what our name implies — pure servants' of God and
humanity — by laying down our own lives and never taking any
life.”
It is worthy of the Khansaheb’ and all that he has stood for
during the past twenty years. , He is a Pathan, and a Pathan
may be said to be born with a rifle or sword in his hand. But
the Khansaheb deliberately asked his Elhudai Khidmatgars to
shed all weapons when he asked them to join the satyagraha
against the Rowlatt Act. He saw that this deliberate giving up
of the weapons of violence had a magical effect. It was the only
remedy for the blood-feuds which were handed down from sire
to son and which had become part of the normal life of a Pathan.
297
\
298 NON-VIOI^NCE IN PEACE AND WAR
They had decimated numerous families, and non-violence
seemed to the Khansaheb to have come as a longed-for salvation.
The violent blood-feuds would otherwise have no end and would
spell the end of the Pathans. He saw as clear as daylight that,
if he could persuade his people not to retaliate, the suicidal feuds
would cease and the Pathans would be able to give a better
account of their bravery. They took up his message, and put
into practice what with them became non-violence of the brave.
Being so clear about his own faith and that of the Khudai
Khidmatgars, there was for him no escape from resignation of
his membership of the Congress Working Committee. His con-
tinuing on it would have been anomalous and might have meant
an end of his life’s work. He could not ask his people to join as
recruits in the army and at the same time forget the law of
tribal retaliation. The simple Pathan would have argued with
him — and the argument would have been irresistible — that the
present war was a war of retaliation and revenge, and that there
was no difference between it and their blood-feuds.
I do not know how far the IQiansaheb has succeeded in
carrying his message to his people. This I know that with him
non-violence is a matter not of intellectual conviction ^but of
intuitive faith. Nothing can, therefore, shake it. About his
followers he cannot say how far they will adhere to it. But that
does not worry him. He has to do his duty which he owes to
them. The result he leaves to God. He derives his ahimsa from
the Holy Quran. He is a devout Musalman. During his stay
with me for over a year I never saw him miss his namaz
(prayers) or his Ramzan fast except when he was ill. But his ,
devotion to Islam does not mean disrespect for other faiths. He
has read the Gita, His reading is slight but selective, and he
immediately assimilates what appeals to him. He lothes long
argument and does not take long to make up his mind. If he
succeeds in his mission, it would mean the solution of many
another problem. But the result, no one can predict. “The lot
is cast into the lap, but the whole disposing thereof is of the
Lord.”
Sevagram* 16-7-40
Harijan^ 21-7-1940
121
THE BEST FIELD FOR AHIMSA
Last week I wrote about three fields for the operation of
ohimsa. I propose to invite attention today to the fourth and
the best field for the operation of non-violence. This' is the
family field, in a wider sense than the ordinary. Thus mem-
bers of an institution should be regarded as a family. Non-
violence as between the members of such families should be
easy to practise. If that fails, it means that we have not deve-
loped the capacity for pure non-violence. For, the love we have
to practise towards our relatives or colleagues in our family or
institution, we have to practise towards our foes, dacoits, etc.
If we fail in one case, success in the other is a chimera.
We have generally assumed that, though it may not‘ be
possible to exercise non-violence in the domestic field, it is
possible to do so in the political field. This has proved a pm'e
delusion. We have chosen to describe our methods adopted so
far as non-violence, and thus caricatured non-violence itself. If
non-violence it was, it was much poor stuff that it proved use-
less at the critical moment. The alphabet of ahimsa is best
learnt in the domestic school, and I can say from experience
that, if we secure success there, we are sure to do so everywhere
else. For a non-violent person the whole world is one family.
He will thus fear none, nor will others fear him. ^
It will be retorted that those who satisfy -such a test of non-
violence will be few and far between. It is quite likely, but
that' is no reply to my proposition. Those who profess to believe
in non-violence should know the implications of that belief. And
if these scare them away, they are welcome to give up the
belief. Now that the Congress Working Committee has made
the position clear, it is necessary that those who claim to believe
in non-violence should know what is expected of them. If, as a
result, the ranks of the non-violent army thin down, it should
not matter. An army, however small, of truly non-violent
soldiers is likely some day to multiply itself. An army of those
vvlio are not truly non-violent is never likely to yield any use
whether it increases or decreases.
299
300
•NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
Let no one xmderstand from the foregoing that a non-
violent army is open only to those who strictly enforce in their
lives all the implications of non-violence. It is open to all those
who accept the implications and make an ever-increasing
endeavour to observe them. There never wiU be an army of
perfectly non-violent people. It wiU be formed of those who
will honestly endeavour to observe non-violence. For the last
fifty years I have striven to make my life increasingly non-
violent and to inspire my co-workers in the same direction, and
I think I have had a fair amoimt of success. The growing dark-
ness around, far from damping my zeal and dimming my faith,
brightens them, and makes the implications of non-violence
more clearly visible to me.
Sevagram, 15-7-40
Harijan, 21-7-1940
122
HOW TO CULTIVATE AHIMSA ?
Q. What is the good of your crying “ ahimsa, aliimsa ’’ in
season and out of season ? Will it by itself teach people to be
non-violent ? Would it not be better, instead, to tell people
how pure ahimsa or the ahijnsa of the strong can be cultivated ?
A. Yours is a very timely and opportune question. I have
attempted before this on more occasions than one to answer it.
But my effort has, I confess, been rather desultory. I have not
concentrated upon it, or given it the weight I might have. This
was all right while I was devoting all my energy to forging means
to give battle to the government. But it had the result of re-
tarding the growth of pure ahimsa, so that today we are not
even within ken of the ahimsa, of the strong. If we now want to
advance fvurther, we ought, at least for some time, to completely
forget the idea of offering non-violent resistance to constituted
authority. If non-violence in ’the domestic field is successfullj'
achieved, we shall surely see the non-violence against constituted
authority revived in its purified form, arid it will be irresistible.
Now that I am no longer in the Congress, I may not offer civil
disobedience even in my own person in \ its name. But I am
HOW TO CULTIVATE AHIMSA ?
I
801
certainly free to offer civil disobedience in my individual capacity
whenever it may be necessary to. No one need suppose that all
civil disobedience will necessarily be taboo while the country is
still being educated in the ahimsa of the strong. But those who
may want to join the non-violent force of my conception should
not entertain any immediate prospect of civil disobedience. They
should vmderstand that, so long as they Jiave not realized ahimsa
in their own person in its pure form, there can be no civil dis-
obedience for them.
Let not the mention of pure ahimsa frighten anybody. If we
have a clear conception of it and have a living faith in its match-
less efficacy, it will not be found to be so hard to practise as it is
sometimes supposed to be. It will be well to remember the im-
mortal Mahabharata verse in this connection. The Seer Poet
therein loudly proclaims to the whole world that Dharma in-
cludes within itself both legitimate Artha and Kama, and asks
why men do not follow the royal road of Dharma that leads to
both earthly and spiritual bliss. Dharma here does not signify
mere observance of externals. It signifies the way of truth and
non-violence. The scriptures have given us two immortal
maxims. One of these is : “ Ahimsa is the supreme Law or
Dharma” The other is : “ There is no other Law or Dharma
than Truth.” These two maxims provide us the key to aU lawful
Artha and Kama. Why should we then hesitate to act up to
them ? Strange as it may appear, the fact remains that people
find the easiest of things oftentimes to be the most difficult to
follow. The reason, to borrow a term from the science of physics,
lies in our inertia." Physicists tell us that inertia is an essential,
and in its own place a most useful, quality of matter. It is that
alone wliich steadies the uniyerse and prevents it from flying off
at a tangent. But for it the latter would be a chaos of motion. But
inertia becomes an incubus and a vice when it ties the mind down
to old ruts. It is this kind of inertia which is responsible for oiur
rooted prejudice that to practise pure ahimsa is difiicult. It is
up to uS to get rid of this incubus. The first step in this direction
is firmly to resolve that all untruth and him&a shall hereafter be
taboo to us, whatever sacrifice it might seem to involve. Por, the
good these may seem to achieve is in appearance only, but in
reality it is deadly poison. If our resolve is firm and our
302
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
conviction clear, it would mean half the battle won, and the
practice of these two qualities would come comparatively easy
to us.
Let us confine ourselves to ahimsa. We have all along re-
garded the spinning wheel, village crafts, etc. as the pillars of
clrdmsa, and so indeed they are. They must stand. But we have
now to go a step further. A votary of ahimsa will of course base
upon non-violence, if he has not already done so, all his relations
with his parents, his children, his wife, his servants, his depend-
ants, etc. But the real test will come at the time of political or
commimal disttirbances or under the menace of thieves and
dacoits. Mere resolve to lay down one’s life under the circum-
stances is not enough. There must be the necessary qualifica-
tion for making the sacrifice. If I am a Hindu, I must fraternize
with the Musalmans and the rest. In my dealings with them I
may not make any distinction between my co-religionists and
those who might belong to a different faith. I vrould seek oppor-
tunities to serve them without any feeling of fear or un-
naturalness. The word ^ fear ’ can have no place in the dictionary
of ahimsa. Having thus qualified himself by his selfless service,
a votary of pure ahimsa will be in a position to make a fit
offering of himself in a communal conflagration. Similarly, to
meet the menace of thieves and dacoits, he will need to go
among, and cultivate friendly relations with, the communities
from which thieves and dacoits generally come.
A brilliant example of this kind of work is provided by
Eavishankar Maharaj. His work among the criminal tribes in
Gujarat has evoked praise even of the Baroda State authorities.
There is an almost unlimited field for this kind of work, and it
does not call for any other .talent in one besides pure love.
Ravishankar Maharaj is an utter stranger to English. Even his
knowledge of Gujarati is barely sufficient for everj^’day use. But
God has blessed him with unlimited neighbourly love. Kis
simplicity easily wins aU hearts, and is the envy of everybody.
Let his example provide a cue and inspiration to all those who
may be similarly engaged in other fields of satyagraha.
Sevagram, 16-7-40
Harijan^ 21-7-1940
123
A FLAW IN AHIMSA
Q. You have appealed to Britons to lay down arms and to
adopt non-violence. But that raises a moral difficulty. A’s
iLliimsa provokes B to himsa and makes him impervious to
appeal to his heart. If a non-violent man comes up against an
inanimate thing, his non-violence will have no effect on it. There
is, therefore, some flaw somewhere in your belief. It is likely
that aliimsa may have success in a restricted field. If so, what
use is it for universal purposes ? Your claim, therefore, of its
universal use falls to the ground,
A. Ahimsa cannot be dismissed so lightly as you think.
AJiimsa is the strongest force known. But if all can use the
strongest force with equal ease, it would lose its importance. V/e
have not been able yet to discover the true measure of the in-
numerable properties of an article of daily use like water. Some
of its properties fill us with wonder. Let us not, therefore, make
light of a force of the subtlest kind like ahimsa, and let us try to '
discover its hidden power with patience and faith. Within a
brief space of time we have carried to a fairly successful con-
clusion a great experiment in the use of this force. As you know
I have not set much store by it. Indeed I have hesitated even to
call it an experiment in ahiTUsa. But according to the legend, as
Hama’s name was enough to float stones, even so the movement
carried on in the name of ahimsa brought about a great awaken-
ing in the coimtry and carried us ahead. It is difficult to forecast
the possibilities when men with unflinching faith carry this ex-
periment further forward. To say that those who use violence
are all insensible is an exaggeration. Some do seem to lose their
senses, but we are bound to be mistaken if we try to base a
moral law on those exceptions. The safest course is to lay down
laws on the strength of our usual experience, and our usual ex-
perience is that .in most cases non-violence is the real antidote of
violence, and it is safe to infer from it that the highest violence
can be met by the highest non-violence.
303
304
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE Atm WAR
But let us consider for a moment inanimate objects. He viiU
surely break his head who strikes it against a stone. But
supposing a stone comes against us through space, we can escape
it by stepping aside, or if there is nowhere to step aside, we can
bravely stay where we are and receive the stone. ^That will
mean minimum injury and, in case it proves fatal, the death will
not be as painful as it would be if we made an effort to ward
it off.
Extend the thought a little further, and it is easy to see that,
if a senseless man is left alone and no one tries to resist him, he is
sure to exhaust himself. Indeed, it is not quite inconceivable that
the loving sacrifice of many may bring an insane man to his
senses. Instances are not wanting of absolutely insane people
having come back to their senses.
Sevagram, 22-7-40
Harijan. 28-7-1940
124
NOT QUITE SO BAD
A friend quotes from a letter received from an English
friend :
"Do you think that Mahatma’s appeal to every Briton is
going to produce right reactions in the mind or heart of a
single Briton ? That appeal has probably created more ill-v;dll
than anything else recently. We live in astonishing and critical
times, and it is frightfully diffi cult to decide what should be
done. At any rate we should try to avoid obvious dangers.
So far as I can see, Mahatma’s imadulterated policy must in-
evitably lead to disaster for todia. How far he liimself intends
following it I do not know, for he has a wonderful way of
adopting himself to his material.”
WeU, I happen to 'know that many more than one single
heart have been touched b^’’ my “ Appeal to Every Briton’ . I
Imow that many English friends were amnous for me to take
some such step. But I do not want to take comfort from the
approbation, however pleasing in itself, of English friends. V/hat
is of value for me is to know that at least one Englishman thinks
NOT QUITE SO BAD
305
as stated in the extract. Such knowledge should put me on my
guard. It should make me more careful, if possible, in the selec-
tion of the words I use to express my thought. But no displeasure
even of the dearest friends can put me ofE the duty I see clearly
in front of me. And this duty of making the Appeal was so
peremptorj' that it was impossible for me to put it off. As certain
as I am writing this, the world has to come to the state to which
I have invited Britain. Those who will be witnesses of that
happy and not far-off event will recall my Appeal with gladness.
1 know that the Appeal has hastened its advent.
Why should a single Briton resent an appeal to him to be
braver than he is, to be better than he is in every respect ? He
may plead inability, but he cannot be displeased by an appeal to
his nobler nature.
Why should the Appeal breed any iU-will at all ? There is
no cause given for it by the manner or the matter of the Appeal.
I have not advised cessation of fight. I have advised lifting it to
a plane worthy of hmnan nature, of the divinity man shares with
God Himself. If the hidden meaning of the remarks is that by
making the Appeal I have strengthened Nazi hands, the sugges-
tion does not bear scrutiny. Herr Hitler can only be confounded
by the adoption by Britain of the novel method of fighting. At
one single stroke he will find that all his tremendous armament
has been put out of action. A warrior lives on his wars whether,
offensive or defensive. He suffers a collapse, if he finds that his
warring capacity is unwanted.
My Appeal is not from a coward to brave people to shed
their bravery, nor is it a mockery from a fair-weather friend to
one in distress. I suggest to the writer to re-read my Appeal in
the light of my explanation.
One thing Herr Hitler, as every critic, may say. I am a fool
without any knowledge of the world or human nature. That
would be a harmless certificate which need excite neither ill-will
nor anger. It would be harmless because I have earned such
certificates before now. This one would be the latest of the many
editions, and I hope not the last, for my foolish experiments have
not yet ended.
So far as India is concerned, my unadulterated policy can
never harm her, if she adopts it. If India as a whole rejects it,
there can be no harm accruing except to those who may foolishly
N.V.— so. '
305
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
pursue it. The correspondent has lighted upon my strong point
when he says : Mahatma has a wonderful way of adapting
himself to his material’’ My instinctive knowledge of my mate-
rial has given me a faith which cannot be moved. I feel within
me that the material is ready. My instinct has not betrayed me
once. But I must not build much upon past experience. One
step enough for me.”
Sevagram, 24-7-40
Harijan, 28-7-1940
125
V7HAT OF THE ' WEAK MAJORITY ’ ?
Prof. Timur of Islamia College, Peshawar, writes :
“The world is indebted to you for revealing to it in these
hard times the hidden values of non-violence. The experiment
which you want to make of defending India against foreign
aggression without .the use of arms would be the boldest moral
experiment of all times. There are two possible results of
such a course. Either the conscience of the invaders may be
awakened by the love of the invaded and they may repent
of their sin. Or the proud invaders may take non-violence as
a sign of physical weakness and degeneration, and^may think
it right to subjugate, rule over, and exploit, a weak people.
This is the doctrine of Nietzsche which is followed in practice
by Hitler. A great loss is involved in such conquest of the
physically weak by the physically strong. A few stroGgwilled
members of the conquered nation may refuse to own allegiance
to the conquerors, but the large majority always submits and
adopts servile manners to preserve its existence. Among them
may be found great scientists, philosophers and artists. Genius
and moral strength are not always combined in the same man.
The strong man does not need armies to defend his liberty.
He sacrifices his body to preserve his soul. Such men are,
however, few and far between. It is the weak majority which
needs protection. The question is how to protect it by mon-
violent methods. This is the real difficulty which every patriot
feels when he thinks of adopting non-violence for the defence
of his country.
I hope you would be kind enough to throw light on this
point in an early issue' of Harijan!*
WHAT OP THE ‘ WEAK MAJORITY ’ ?
807
The weak majority no doubt needs protection. If all were
soldiers either of ahimsa or himsa, no such questions as call for
discussion in these columns would arise. There is always a weak
majority that would want protection against man’s mischief. The
orthodox method we know. Nazism is its logical outcome. It is
an answer to a definite want. A terrible wrong wantonly per-
petrated against a whole nation cried out for redress. And
Hitler arose to avenge it. Whatever the ultimate fortune of the
war, Germany will not be humiliated again. Humanity will not
stand a second outrage. But in seeking to avenge the wrong by
the wrong method of violence brought to very near perfection,
Hitler has brutalized not only Germans but a large part of
humanity. The end of it we have not yet reached. For Britain,
so long as she holds to the orthodox method, has to copy the
Nazi methods, if she is to put up a successful defence. Thus the
logical outcome of the violent method seems to be increasingly
to brutalize man including “ the weak majority ”. For it has to
give its defenders the required measure of co-operation.
Now imagine the same majority defended after the method
of non-violence. As it admits of no grossness, no fraud, ho
malice, it must raise the moral tone of the defenders. Hence there
will be a corresponding rise in the moral tone of the “weak
majority ” to be defended. No doubt there will be difference in
degree, but not in kind.
But the snag comes in when we consider the ways and
means of working the non-violent method. In working the other,
there is no difficulty in getting the hiunan material. Therefore
that way seems easy. In getting non-violent defenders, we have
to pick and choose. Money cannot buy them. The non-violent
process is wholly different from the one commonly known. I
can only say that my own experience in organizing non-violent
action for half a century fills me with hope for the future. It has
succeeded in a marked measure in protecting the “ weak
majority”. But haK a centmy is nothing in discovering the
'hidden possibilities of this force and working them out. Those,
therefore, like the correspondent who are attracted to non-
, violence should, according to their ability and opportunity, join
the experiment. It has entered upon a most interesting, though
at the same time a most difficult, stage. I am niyself sailing on
808
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
uncharted waters. I have to take soundings every half-hour.
The difiSculty only braces me for the struggle.
Sevagram, 6-8-40
Harijan, 11-8-1940
126
IS NON-VIOLENCE IMPOSSIBLE ?
“ One may admit that in theory non-violence is an infalli-
ble weapon, and that no power on earth can be a match for
the man who has achieved non-violence to the fullest extent.
But is this possible? There may be a rare yogi who can tame
wild beasts like lions and tigers and render them meek as
lambs, but the average man must resort to a rifle or similar
weapon to protect himself against such beasts. You with your
wonderful power may convert othera by the sheer force of
your thought, but the average man has to have recourse to
worldly remedies like a law court, pleaders and so on. Even
in the dim and distant past we rarely hear of men who prac-
tised ahimsa in daily affairs. Lord Buddha tried for a time
to lead people along the path of ahimsa, but what happened
after him ? Society went back to its old ways, forgetting Bud-
dha's teaching. The past, therefore, offers little promise, for
the future, of society going along the lines of ahimsa any more
than it has done before, and our sages, therefore, must have
wisely left the world and resorted to the forest for practising
^ truth and non-violence. You may inspire a few persons to^
study ahimsa but society as a whole is not likely to take to it.
The same argument applies to India as a nation.’ She must
needs seek means other than those of ahimsa in order to win
her liberty. It is idle to expect an infant learning his primer
to understand a book like Tilak's Gita. Even so is it idle to
expect people steeped in worldly pleasures to understand the
infallibility of ahijnsa. Besides ahimsa is the final goal, attain-
ment of which requires much greater preparation than is re-
quired in order to obtain a degree in medicine or engineering.
We shall have to have numerous colleges and universities for
the teaching of the science and art of truth and non-violence.
Today society directs its energies to creating new wants and
satisfying them. How do you expect it to *tum those energies
in the direction of researches in ahimsa ? ”
IS NON-VIOLENCE IMPOSSIBLE?
S09
The doubts and difficulties raised by this correspondent
occur to others also, and I have on various occasions tried to
solve them too. But when the Working Committee of the Con-
gress has been instrumental in making of ahimsa a live issue, it
seems necessary to deal with these doubts and difficulties at some
length.
The correspondent doubts in substance the universal applica-
tion of ahimsa, and asserts that society has made little progress
towards it. Teachers like Buddha arose and made some effort
with some little success perhaps in their lifetime, but society is
-just where it was in spite of them. Ahimsa may be good enough
to be the duty of an individual ; for society it is good for nothing,
and India too will have to take to violence for her freedom.
The argvunent is, I think, fundamentally wrong. The last
statement is incorrect inasmuch as the Congress has adhered to
non-violence as the means for the attainment of Swaraj. It has
indeed gone a step further. The question having been raised as
to whether non-violence continues to be the weapon against all
internal disturbances, the A.I.C.C. clearly gave the answer in the
affirmative. It is only for protection against outside aggression
that the Congress has maintained that it would be necessary to
have an >army. And then even on this matter there was a con-
siderable body of 'the members of the A.I.C.C. who voted against
the resolution. This dissent has got to be reckoned with when
the question voted upon is one of principle. The Congress policy
must always be decided by a majority vote, but it does not cancel
the minority vote. It stands. Where there is no principle in-
volved and there is a programme to be carried out, the minority
has got to follow the majority. But where there is a principle
involved, the dissent stands, and it is bound to express itself in
practice when the occasion arises. That means that ahimsa for
all occasions and aU pinposes has been recognized by a society,
however small it may be, and that ahimsa as a remedy to be used
by society has made fair strides. Whether it will make fruther
strides or no is a different matter. The Working Committee’s re-
solution, therefore, fails to lend any support to the correspond-
ent’s doubts. On the contrary it should, in a certain degree,
dispel them.
Now for the argument that I am but a rare individual, and
that what little society has done in the matter of ahimsa is due to
310
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
my influence, and that it is sure to disappear with me. This is
not right. The Congress has a number of leaders who can think
for themselves. The Maulana is a great thinker of keen intellect
and vast reading. Few can equal him in his Arabic and Persian
scholarship. Experience has taught him that ahimsa alone can
make India free. It was he who insisted on the resolution
accepting ahiTnsa as a weapon against internal disturbances.
Pandit Jawaharlal is not a man to stand in awe of anyone. His
study of history and contemporary events is second to none. It
is after mature thought that he has accepted ahimsa as a means
for the attainment of Swaraj. It is true that he has said that he
would not hesitate to accept Swaraj if non-violence failed and
it could be won by means of violence. But that is not relevant
to the present issue. There are not a few other big names in
the Congress who believe in ahirnsa as the only weapon at least
for the attainment of Swaraj. To think that all of them will
give up the way of ahimsa as soon as I am gone, is to insult
them and to insult human nature. We must believe that every-
one can think for himself. Mutual respect to that extent is
essential for progress. By crediting our companions with inde-
pendent judgment we strengthen them and make it easy for
them to be independent-minded even if they are proved to be
weak.
I ho^e neither the correspondent nor anyone else believes
that the Congress or many Congress leaders have bidden good-
bye to ahimsa. To the limited extent that I have pointed out
faith in ahiTnsa has been reiterated and made clear beyond any
doubt by the Congress. I agree that the limit laid down by the
Congress considerably narrows down the sphere of ahimsa and
dims its splendour. But the limited ahimsa of the Congress is
good enough for the purpose of our present argument. For I
am trying to make out that the field of ahimsa is widening and
the limited acceptance of ahimsa by the Congress sufficiently
supports my position. r
If we turn our eyes to the time of which history has any
record dovm to our own time, we shall find that man has been
steadily progressing towards ahimsa. Our remote ancestors
were cannibals. Then came a time when they were fed up with
cannibalism and they began to live on chase. Next came a
stage when man was ashamed of leading the life of a wandering
IS NON-VIOLENCE IMPOSSIBLE ?
811
hunter. He therefore took to agriculture and depended prin-
cipally on mother earth for his food. Thus from being a nomad
he settled down to civiKzed stable life, foimded villages and
towns, and from member of a family he became member of a
community and a nation. All these are signs of progressive
ahimsa and diminishing himsa. Had it been otherwise, the
human species should have been extinct by now, even as many
of the lower species have disappeared.
Prophets and avatars have also taught the lesson of ahimsa
more or less. Not one of them has professed to teach himsa.
And how should it be otherwise ? Himsa does not need to be
taught. Man as animal is violent, but as Spirit is non-violent.
T^e moment he awakes to the Spirit within he cannot remain
violent. Either he progresses towards ^ahirnsa or rushes to his
doom. That is why the. prophets and avatars have taught the
lessons of truth, harmony, brotherhood, justice, etc — all attri-
butes of ahimsa. '
And yet violence seems to persist, even to the extent of
thinking people like the correspondent regarding it as the final
weapon. But, as I have shown, history and experience are
against him.
, If we believe that mankind has steadily progressed towards
ahimsa^ it follows that it has to progress towards it still fur-
ther. Nothing in this world is static, everything is kinetic. If
there is no progression, then there is inevitable retrogression.
No one can remain without the eternal cycle, xmless it be God
Himself.
The present war is the saturation point in violence. It
spells to my mind also its doom. Daily I have testimony of
the fact that ahiinsa was never before appreciated by mankind
as it is today. All the testimony from the West that I continue
to receive points in the same direction. The Congress has pledged
itself to ahimsa however limited. I invite the correspondent
and doubters like him to shed their doubts and plunge con-
fidently into the sacred sacrificial fire of ahivisa. Then I have
little doubt that the Congress will retrace its step. “ It is always
willing.” Well has Pritam, our poet sung :
Happiest are those that plunge in the fire,
The lookers-on are all but scorched by fiames.
Sevagram, 5-8-40
Harijan, 11-8-1940
127
THE LIVE ISSUE
Wait, Watch, and Pray
A few members of the A. L C. C. who are out-and-out
believers in noli-violence visited Sevagram the other day. Some
of them had remained neutral on the Delhi resolution, some
had opposed it. What was the right attitude ? What were they
to do next ? What was the programme before them ? Should
they not retire forthwith ? These and other questions were
troubling them, and they did not know what to do. In response
Gandhiji began to do some loud t hinkin g.
'‘Wait, watch, and pray,’’ said he, and remained sDent for
a while. Then he said : “ You must carefully follow what I am
writing from week to week. You must be absolutely sure that
you are out-and-out believers in non-vdolence. Can your ahimsa
stand the test ? Rehearse to yourself what you would do in
case of a riot. Those who have differed from us are no cowards.
If they say that they cannot do without an army and police,
they deserve a respectful hearing. I myself do not know what
I should do in a difficult situation. You know I have capitu-
lated on the question of the desirability of maintaining a police
force. But what I can say is that I shall hope to behave non-
\dolently, should the occasion arise. I should not like to die
before my death. I do not want to prepare India for military
defence from today. We should never forget that v/e are not
the whole of India. The Congress is without doubt a pov/erful
organization, but the Congress is not the whole of India. The
Congress may not have an army, but those who do not believe
in non-violence wiU. And if the Congress too surrenders, there
is no one to represent the no-army mentality. This was my
argument in a nutshelL But I failed to carry conviction.
Therefore I must find fault not with my comrades but with my-
self. There must be some weakness in my argument, and so I
must prepare myself to carry conwction to those v/ho differ
from me.”
312
THE LIVE ISSUE
818
“ But/’ he added, ‘‘ I have digressed. What you and I have
to do is to show our ahimsa when there is rioting or similar
disturbance. If every one of us, wherever he is, begins doing
.so there will come into being a non-violent army. Even the
limited non-violence that all are subscribing to would not have
come into being, if we had seen no successful demonstrations
of it. So we have to hold on to our faith, even if when the
time comes we may fail. There is no use arguing with the com-
rades who have differed from us, I hope, only temporarily. The
question is one of demonstrating the truth in us, and we won’t
do it, unless we show that we have no malice, no bitterness, no
inclination to find faults. We have to prepare ourselves for the
terrible ordeal. The testing time may come sooner than we
imagine. I am sailing on an uncharted sea. I have no cut and
dried programme, and I am brooding from moment to moment.
In the meanwhile follow my weekly writings and carry out the
constructive programme. The time for resignation is not yet.
We must not be misunderstood.”
“But,” said a worker, “you have asked us to retire imme-
diately, and all of us are ready.”
“Your readiness is good, and it is enough for me for the
time being. If you conscientiously voted against the Delhi
resolution, you did nothing wrong ; if you remained neutral,
you did nothing wrong. You would have been wrong, if you
had joined hands with those who sought to defeat the resolution
on any but the ground of non-violence. For having given your
vote on the Wardha resolution and having lost, you could not
vote against the Delhi resolution which was the natural corollary
of the Wardha resolution.”
“But it was by accident that those who voted against the
Delhi resolution, did so.”
“No, it was by design. They are no believers in non-
violence to the extent you are, but they wanted to defeat the
resolution for the sake of their policy.”
“ But then how long are we to remain in the Congress ?”
‘ “ I cannot give a definite answer. I shall have a talk with
the Maulana. We must not rush the Maulana and the Work-
ing Committee. If they find that the out-and-out non-violence
people were the sustaining part of the Congress organization,
they will retrace their step.”
314
NON-VIOI^CE IN PEACE AND WAR
“ Then how long shall we ,wait
“ Until I give you the word/’
‘'But/' said one of them, “I disliked the Wardha resolution
and wanted to resign at once.’’
“You might have done so. Then you would have been
within your rights. But tb do so now might savour of violence
and self-righteousness. You must remember that I waited for
more than a year before taking the final step, and then too I took
it with the full approval of the friends of the Working
Committee.” ^
Sevagram, 7-8-40 M. D.
Harijan, 11-8-1940
128
MORAL SUPPORT
A friend writes as follows :
“ On the declaration of war you had advised giving moral
support to Britain. Many persons never understood the im-
plications of such support. You have never explained them
either, so far as I know. I am a regular reader of Harijanbandhu,
but I have not seen a clear explanation there. Everyone puts
his own interpretation on the words. At the last sitting of the
Gujarat Provincial Congress Committee the leaders said: ‘Bapu
was ready to give moral support to Britain. What else has the
Congress done in its latest resolution? As a matter of ^fact,
the Congress asks for more than it promises to give. Bapu
was willing to give all for nothing,' If war is itself a wrong
act, how can it deserve moral support or blessings ? In the
Mahabharata, was the help that Lord Krishna gave to Arjuna
moral, or was it more destructive than the deadliest weapons
of war ? " «
I did explain in Harijan what I meant by moral support.
It is possible that the explanation did not appear in Harijan^-
bandhu. In my English writings things are often left to be
understood. The ellipses need, however, to be brought out in
translations.
Broadly speaking, Britain could have had moral support
from the Congress, if only she had acted justly towards India.
There was no spirit of bargaining in my proposal because the
help was not offered in exchange for anything.
Suppose my ‘friend possesses moral strength which he has
acquired through tcpasya. And suppose I am in need of this
MORAL SUPPORT
315
Strength. I shall not get it from him for the asking. He may
always be ready to give it to me, but if I have not the capacity
within me to take it from him, how shall I ever obtain it ?
Moral support cannot reaUy be given in the sense of giving. It
automatically comes to him who is qualified to take it. And
such a one can take it in abimdance.
The Congress has this moral reservoir. The acceptance of
the creed of truth and non-violence has been its tapasya. It has
acquired world prestige through the acceptance of truth and
non-violence for the attainment of its goal. If the Congress
could have given its blessings to Britain, the world would have
adjudged Britain’s cause to be just. The masses over whom the
Congress holds sway would also have acknowledged justice to be
on Britain’s side. But in all this the Congress would have had
nothing material to give. The British government would, by
its own action, have acquired moral prestige or strength.
Though the Congress would not give one man or one pice as
material aid, its moral support and blessings would definitely
have turned the scales in favour of Britain. This is my belief.
That my belief may be groimdless and that the Congress never
had any moral prestige is quite possible. The determination of
this question is unnecessary for my argument. .
But the opportunity for rendering moral support now
seems almost to have gone. The Congress felt itself tmable to
adopt my course. It cannot be taken mechanically. It pre-
supposes a living faith in truth and non-violence. The greatest
quality in the Congress is this that it has never claimed to have
what it really does not possess. And therefore its resolutions
are dignified and carry force with them.
The help that the Congress in its latest resolution promises
to give is material and for a consideration, eminently just, no
doubt, but it is not and cannot be unconditional I do not
suggest that this position is either untenable or morally
wrong. The resolution has dignity because it is the considered
opinion of the majority. But by passing it the Congress has.
In my opinion, surrendered the prestige it had or was supposed
to have. Many congressmen say that, while they firmly believed
that they could attain Swaraj through non-violence, they had
never meant it to be understood that they could retain it also
through non-violence. The entire outside world, however.
516
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
believed that the Congress was showing the golden way to the
abolition of war. No one outside India ever dreamed that, if
the Congress could wrest independence from a mighty power
like Britain purely through non-violence, it would not be able
to defend it also by the same means.
In my opinion Lord Krishna’s help to Arjuna cannot be
said to be moral, because he himself had an army and was an
►expert in the art of war. Duryodhana acted foolishly in that
he asked for Krishna’s army, while Arjuna got what he wanted
in the person of the expert in the science of war. Therefore, if
we interpret the Mahabharata literally, Lord Krishna’s strength
was certainly more destructive than that of his army. Because
of his scientific skill Ejrishna was able, with an army of seven
divisions, to destroy Duryodhana’s army of eleven. But it is
well known that I have never looked upon the Mahabharata as
a mere record of earthly warfare. In the garb of an epic the
poet has described the eternal warfare within the individual as
well as in society, between Truth and Untruth, Violence and
Non-violence, Right and Wrong. Looking at the epic even
superficially one can understand how the great Vyasa has
demonstrated that in this war the victor was no better off than
the vanquished. Out of that vast concourse of warriors only
seven remained to tell the tale. And the poet gives a true pic-
tiure of the woeful state of mind also of these seven. The author
has shown clearly too that in armed warfare the contending
parties are certain tq stoop to meaimess and trickery. When
occasion arose even the great Yudhisht^a had to resort to
untruth to save the battle.
One more question of the ^vriter remains to be answered.
If war is itself a wrong act, how can it be worthy of moral
support or blessings ? I believe all war to be wholly wrong.
But if we scrutinize the motives of two warring parties, we may
find one to be in the right and the other in the wrong. For
instance, if A wishes to seize B’s country, B is obviously the
wronged one. Both fight with arms. I do not believe in violent
warfare, but all the same, B, whose cause is just, deserves my
moral help and blessings.
Sevagram, 12-8-40
Harijan, 18-8-1940
129
WHAT SHOULD A BRITON DO AND NOT DO ?
Q. In your appeal ‘ To Every Briton ’ you say : “ You will
invite Herr Hitler and Signor Mussolini to take what they want
You will give all your ‘ earthly possessions ’ but never your
souls or your minds You will refuse to own allegiance to
thenu” Please explain clearly what a Briton should or should
not do. I ask the question because your answer will have a
bearing on the duty of every satyagrahi.
A. Not to yield your soul to the conqueror means that you
will refuse to do that which your conscience forbids you to do.
Suppose the ‘ enemy ’ were to ask you to rub your nose on the
groimd or to pull your ears or to go through such humiliating
performances, you will not submit to any of these humiliations.
But if he robs you of your possessions, you wiQ yield them because
as a votary of ahimsa you have from the beginning decided that
earthly possessions have nothing to do with your soul. That
which you look upon as your own you may keep only so long
as the world allows you to own it.
Not to yield your mind means that you will not give way
to any temptation. Man is oftentimes weak-minded enough to
be caught in the snare of greed and honeyed words. We see this
happening daily in our social life. A weak-minded man can
never be a satyagrahi. The latter’s ^ no ’ is invariably a ‘ no ^
and his *yes’ an eternal ‘yes’. Such a man alone has the
strength to be a devotee of truth and ahimsa. But here one
must know the difference between steadfastness and obstinacy.
If after having said ‘ yes ’ or ‘ no ’ one finds out that the decision
was wrong and in spite of that knowledge clings to it, that is
obstinacy and foUy. It is necessary to think things out carefully
and thoroughly before coming to any decision.
The meaning of refusal to own allegiance is clear. You will
not bow to the supremacy of the victor, you vnU not help him
to attain his object. Herr Hitler has never dreamt of possessing
Britain. He wants the British to admit defeat. The victor can
then demand anything he likes from the vanquished, and the
317
318 NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAB
latter has perforce to yield. But if defeat is not admitted, the
enemy will fight until he has killed his opponent. A satyagrahij
however, is dead to his body even before the enemy attempts
to kill him, i.e. he is free from attachment to his body and only
lives in the victory of the soul. Therefore, when he is already
thus dead, why should he yearn to kill anyone ? To die in the
act of killing is in essence to die defeated. Because, if the enemy
is unable to get what he wants from you alive, he will decide
to get it after killing 'you. If, on the other hand, he realizes
that you have not the remotest thought ^in your mind of raising
your hand against him even for the sake of your life, he will
lack the zest to loll you. Every hunter has had this experience.
No one has ever heard of anyone hunting cows.
You may find that I have not answered the questions that
you had in your mind. I haye made a humble effort and dealt
with your general question by giving you a few homely exam-
ples. I hope that from them you will be able to deduce answers
to the questions left unanswered.
Dignity of the soul and self-respect are interpreted
differently by different persons. I am aware that self-respect is
often misinterpreted. The over-senSitive man may see disres-
pect or hurt in almost everything. Such a man does not really
understand what self-respect is. That has been my experience
in many cases. But no harm accrues even if a non-violent man
holds mistaken notions of self-respect. He can die cheerfully
for the sake of what he believes to be his dignity and self-
respect. Only he has no right to injure or kill the supposed
wrong-doer.
Sevagram, 13-8-40
Harijan^ 18-8-1940
130
NAZISM IN ITS NAKEDNESS
A*^Dutch friend writes :
‘*you will perhaps be able to remember me having made
a drawing of you at Remain RoUand^s in 1931. Even before
meeting you in person I followed ^he Indian movement with
interest, in particular your leademhip and your methods of
combat. I am a Dutchman and lived for many years in Ger-
many, where I had built up a living as an artist. Nazism, which
gained hold in Germany seven years ago, caused me many
conscientious doubts, especially with regard to the schooling
of my three children. I often thought of writing to you to
ask your advice; 1 knew, however, how fully your time was occu-
pied and did not want to embarrass you with my difficulties.
Eventually I managed to settle my affairs to my own satis-
faction.
It is just one year ago since I left my house in Munich
to spend some time in Holland. When war broke out in Sep-
tember we did not return to Germany but remained in Holland,
since I had no wish to expose my children to the mental state
of a country at war. On 10th May, by the use of every possible
subtle trick, Holland was overpowered. After four days of the
most ruthless bombing we fled to England and are now on our
way to Java, the country of my birth, where I hope to find
workj not as one of the group which exploits the colony but
as a guest.
Europe has put its trust in violence, but for centuries past
in the wars of soldier against soldier certain rules of chivalry
were observed. Nazism has thrown that code overboard, and I
can say with a clear conscience that no country has ever made
use of such vicious treachery, villainy and cowardice in attain-
ing its ends as modem Germany. The upbringing even of little
children is based on the exercise of violence. Nazism system-
atically trains children to cunning and treachery even towards
their own parents, to immorality and much more in the same
spirit. When Indian students, who in the course of years have
visited me at home, enthused about Germany, they were merely
deceived by the gloss which Nazism knows so well how to lay
on. A short explanation always convinced them of the tre-
mendous, difference between ‘Indian National Socialism’, as they
often called your movement, and Hitler’s Nazism.
319
S20
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
Two boo^. The Revolution of Destruction and Hitler S'peaJzs,
have been written by Hermann Rauschning, a former inti-
mate of Hitler, These books give a very clear impression of the
movement in Germany, and should be read by all thinking peo-
ple. Hitler aims at nothing less than the destruction of all
moral values, and in the bulk of German youth he has already
attained that end.
Your article in Harijan about the Jewish problem in Ger-
many particularly interested me since I had many Jewish
friends there. You say in it that, if ever a war were justified,
it is this one against Germany. In the same article, however,
you write that, if you were a Jew, you would attempt to soften
the hearts of the Nazis by non-violence. Recently you also
advised Britain and the British people to surrender their beau-
tiful island to the German invader, without resistance by force,,
and to conquer him afterwards by non-violence. There is pro-
bably no man in the whole history^ who has a better knowledge
of the practice of non-violence than yourself. Your views have
awakened veneration and love for you in millions of hearts
not only in India but in the outside world as well. Even your
opponents are compelled eventually to honour you and admit
the rightness of your aims and methods. But your opponents
are the British, a people that, though like every other it has
its^weak points, in spite of its business sense, retains a heart.
Through Nazism, the German youth has lost all individual-
ity of thought and feeling. The great mass of young people
has lost its heart and is degraded to the level of a machine.
The German conduct of the war is absolutely mechanical:
machines are driven by robot men who have no qualms of
conscience about crushing under their tanks the bodies of
women and children, bombing open towns, killing hundreds of
thousands of women and children, and on occasion using them
as a screen for their advance, or distributing poisoned food.
These are all facts, the truth of which I can vouch for. I have
spoken with many of your followers about the possibility of
applying non-violence against Germany. A friend of mine,
whose work it is to cross-examine German prisoners of war
in England, was deeply shocked by the spiritual narrowness and
heartlessness of these young men, and agreed with me that
non-violence could not be applied with any success against such
robots. The most terrible side of the question is the fact that
Hitler has-been able, in the short space of seven years, to
sink German youth to such depths of demoralization. A glance
at either of the books mentioned above will convince you of
that. I know of no other example in history of a people sinking
spiritually so low.
NAZISM IN ITS NAKEDNESS
821
I hope that my letter has not trespassed too much upon
your time. On the return journey to Europe in a happier time
which, if God wills, may soon be possible, I shall try to bring
my wife and children for a short visit to you.”
The friend has sent his name and address. But I withhold
both for fear of harm coming to him through tmnecessary pub-
licity. The letter must be valued on its own intrinsic merits.
What, however, concerns me is not so much his characteri-
zation of Nazism as his belief that non-violent action may have
no effect on Hitler or the Germans whom he has turned into so
many robots. Non-violent action, if it is adequate, must influ-
ence Hitler and easily the duped Germans. No man can be
turned into a permanent machine. Immediately the dead
weight of authority is lifted from his head, he begins to function
normally. To lay down any such general proposition as my
friend has, betrays ignorance of the working of non-violence.
The Briti-sh Government can take no -risks, can make no experi-
ments in which they have not even a workable faith. But if
ever an opportunity could be given to me, I should not hesitate
to try, in spite of my physical limitations, what would appear
to be impossible. For in ahimsa it is not the votary who acts in
his ovm strength. Strength comes from God. If, therefore, the
way is opened for me to go. He will give me the physical endur-
ance and clothe my word with the needed power. Anyway all
through mjr life I have acted in that faith. , Never have I attri-
buted any independent strength to myself. This may be con-
sidered by men who do not believe in a higher Power than them-
selves as a drawback and a helpless State. I mxxst admit that
limitation of ahimsa if it be accounted as such.
Sevagraih, 6-8-40
Harijan, 18-8-1940
I
N. V.— 21
131
AN INTERESTING DISCOURSE
I
The Scope of Ahimsa
^‘You see that I am answering every one of your questions
straightaway without the slightest hesitation. That is because"
the great question underlying your questions possesses me and
1 have rehearsed to myself every one of the situations arising
out of the varioixs implications of ahimsa,'' These words were
uttered by Gandhiji towards the close of a long and interesting
discourse with a number of friends from Poona who had come
for the sole purpose of clearing their doubts on ahimsa. They
were all out-and-out believers in non-violence, or if they were
not, they had come all the way from Poona in order to be such
believers, after their doubts were cleared.’ Balasaheb ICher, the
ex-Prime Minister of Bombay, accompanied them. They had
drawn up an exhaustive questionnaire, even at the risk of mak-
ing some of their questions trite, for 'they did not want to leave
any room for doubt.
The first question was about the limits and implications of
ahimsa and the extent of its application. Should one stop with
the human species or extend it to all creation ?
Gandhiji said : “ I was not prepared for this question. For
the Congress ahimsa is naturally confined to the political field
and therefore only to the human species. Hence out-and-out
non-violence means for our purpose every variety of non-
violence on the political field. In concrete terms it covers
family relations, relations with constituted authority, internal
disorders and external aggression. Put in another way it covers
all human relations.”
“ Then what about meat-eating and egg-eating ? Do they
consist with non-violence ?”
“They do. Otherwise we should have to exclude Mussal-
mans and Christians and a vast number of Hindus as possible
322
AN INTERESTING DISCOURSE
323
co-workers in ahirasa. I have known many meat-eaters to be
far* more non-violent than vegetarians/^
“But what if we had to give them up for the sake of a
principle ?”
“ Oh yes, we would, if we had to compromise our principle.
Our principle is defined as I have shown already.”
A Wrong Analogy
“If, as' you have said, Polish resistance to the German,
invasion was almost non-violent, and you would thus seem to
reconcile yourself with it, why do you object to the Wardlia
resolution of the Working Committee ?”
“ Surely,” said Gandhiji, “ there is no analogy between the
two cases. If a man fights with his sword single-handed against
a horde of dacoits armed to the teeth, I should say he is fighting
almost non-violently. Haven’t I said to our women that, if in
defence of their honour they used their nails and teeth and even
a dagger, I should regard their conduct non-violent ? She does
not know the distinction between himsa and ahimsa. She acts
spontaneously. Supposing a mouse in fighting a cat tried to
resist the cat with his sharp beak, would you call that mouse
violent ? In the same way, for the Poles to stand valiantly
against the German hordes vastly superior in numbers, military
equipment and strength, was almost non-violence. I should
not mind repeating that statement over and' over again. You
must give its full value to the word ‘ almost But we are 400
millions here. If we were to organize a big army and prepare
ourselves to fight foreign aggression, how could we by any
stretch of imagination call ourselves almost non-violent, let
alone non-violent ? The Poles were unprepared for the way in
which the enemy swooped down upon them. When we talk of
armed preparation, we contemplate preparation to meet any
violent combination with our superior violence. If India ever
prepared' herself that way, she would constitute the greatest
menace to world peace. For, if we take that path, we will also
have to choose the path of exploitation like the European
nations. That is why I still regret the moment when my words
lacked the power of convincing the Sardar and Rajaji. By
having passed that resolution we proclaimed to the world that
the ahimsa we had subscribed to all these years was not really
ahimsa but a form of himsaj*
324
X
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
Administering Non-violently
Q. “ How will you run your administration non-violently
A. If you assume that we would have won independence
by non-violent means, it means that the bulk of the country had
been organized non-violently. Without the vast majority of
people having become non-violent, we could not attain non-
violent Swaraj. If, therefore, we attain Swaraj by purely non-
violent means, it should not be difficult for us to carry on Jthe
administration 'without the military. The goondas too 'wiU then
have come imder our control. If, for instance, in Sevagram we
have five or seven goondas in a population of seven hundred who
are non-violently organized, the five or seven wiU either live
under the discipline of the rest or leave the village.
‘‘But you will see that I am answering the question with
the utmost caution, and my truth mahgs me admit that we might
have to maintain a police force. But the police will be after our
pattern, and not the British pattern. As we shall have adult
suffrage, the voice of even the yoimgest of us will count. That
IS why I have said that the ideally non-violent State will be an
ordered anarchy. That State will be the best governed wliich
is governed the least. The pity is that no one trusts me with
the reins of government ! Otherwise I would show how to
govern non-violently. If I maintain a police force, it will be
a body of reformers.’’
“But,” someone retorted, “you had the power in the
Congress?”
“That was a paper-boat,” said Gandhiji. “And then you
must not forget that I never spared the Congress ministries.
Mimshi and Pantji came in for. a lot of strictures from me. As
I have said in another connection even the dirty water from the
gutter, when it mixes with the water of the Ganga, becomes as
pure as the Ganga water ; even so I had expected even the
goondas would work xmder Congress discipline. But e\ddently
our ministers had not attained the purifjdng potency of the
fabled Ganga.” i
“ But,” said Shri Kher, intervening at this stage, “ the Con- '
gross ministers had no non-violent power 'with them. Even if
500 goondas had run amok and had been allowed to go unchecked,
they would have dealt untold havoc. I do not know how even
you would have dealt with them.”
AN INTERESTING DISCOURSE
325
“Surely, surely,” said Gandhiji, “I had rehearsed such
situations. The minis ters could on such occasions have gone
out and allowed themselves to be done to death by the goondas.
But let us face the fact that we had not the requisite ahimsa.
We went in with our half-baked ahimsa. I do not mind it,
inasmuch as we gave up power the moment we felt we should
give it up. I am sure that, if we had adhered to strictest non-
violence during these two or three years, the Congress would
have made a tremendous advance in the direction of ahimsa
and also independence.”
“But,” said Balasaheb, “fomr or five years ago when there
was a riot, and I appealed to the leaders to go and throw them-
selves into the confiagration, no one was ready.”
“ So you are supporting my argument. You agree that our
loyalty to ahimsa was lip-loyalty and not heart-loyalty. And
if even the half-baked ahimsa carried us a long way, does it
not follow that thorough ahimsa would have carried us very
far indeed, even if it had not already brought us to the goal ?”
Non-violent Army
“ But we cannot visualize how you wiU stand non-violently
against a foreign invasion.”
“I cannot draw the whole picture to you because we have
no past experience to fall back upon and there is no reality
‘facing us today. We have got the Government army manned by
the Sikhs, Pathans and Gurkhas. What I can conceive is this
that with my non-violent army of, say, two thousand people I
should put myself between the two contending armies. But
this, I know, is no answer. I can only say that we shall be’ able
to reduce the invader’s violence to a minimum. The general
of a non-violent army has got to have greater presence of mind
than that of a violent army, and God would bless him_with the
necessary resourcefulness to meet situations as they arise.”
Shri Kher now raised a philosophical question. “ The world,”
he said, “ is made up of pairs of opposites. Where there is fear,
there is courage too. When we walk on the edge of a precipice
we walk warily, for we have fear. Pear is not a thing to despise.
Will your non-violent army be above^ these pairs of opposites ?”
“ No,” said Gandhiji, replying in the same philosophical ter-
minology. “ No, for the simple reason that my army will repre-
sent one of the pair — ahimsa — out of the pair of himsa and
326
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
ahimsa. Neither I nor my army is above the pair of opposites.
The state of gunatita, in the language of the Gita, rises above
himsa and ahimsa both. Fear has its use, but cowardice has
none. I may not put my finger into the jaws of a snake, but the
very sight of the snake need not strike terror into me. The
trouble is that we often die many times before death overtakes
us.
“ But let me explain what my army will be like. They need
not and will not have the resourcefulness or imderstanding of
the general, but they will have a perfect sense of discipline to
carry out faithfully his orders. The general should have the
quality which commands the unquestioning obedience of his
army, and he will expect of them nothing more than this
obedience. The Dandi March was entirely my conception.
Pandit Motilalji first laughed at it, he thought it to be a quixotic
adventure, and Jamnalalji suggested instead a march on the
Viceroy’s House ! But I could not think of . anything but the
salt march as I had to think in terms of millions of our country-
men. It was a conception that God gave me. Pandit Motilalji
argued for some time, and then he said he must not argue, as
after all I was the general and he must have faith in me. Later
when he saw me in Jambusar he was completely converted, for
he saw with his own eyes the awakening that had come over the
masses. And it was an almost magical awakening. Where in -
history shall we find parallels of the cool courage that cur
women displayed in such large numbers,?
“ And yet none of the thousands who took part in the move-
ment were above the average. They were erring, sinning mor-
tals. God has a way of making use of the most fragile instru-
ments and remaining Himself untouched by everything. Only
He is gunatita.
The Real Equipment
“ And then what after all is the army that wins ? You
know Rama’s reply to Vibhishana when the latter wondered
how Rama would be able to conquer a foe like Ravana, when he
had no chariot, no armour, nor any shoes to his feet ? Rama
says :*
“The chariot, my dear Vibhishana, that wins the victory
for Rama is of a different sort from the usual one. Manliness
* Gandliiji only made a reference to these verses from Tulsidas’ Rarrmyan.
I translate them here fully for the benefit of the reader. M.D.
AN INTERESTING DISCOURSE
327
and courage are its wheels; unflinching truth and character its
banners and standards; strength, discrimination, self-restraint
and benevolence its horses, with forgiveness, mercy, equanimity
their reins ; prayer to God is that conqueror’s unerring chario-
teer, dispassion his shield, contentment his sword, charity his
axe, intellect his spear, and perfect science his stout bow. His
- pure and imwavering mind stands for a quiver, his mental
quietude and his practice of yama and niyama stand for the
sheaf of arrows, and the homage he pays to Brahmans and his
guru is his impenetrable armour. There is no other equipment
for victory comparable to this ; and, my dear friend, there is
no enemy who can conquer the man who takes his stand on
the chariot of dharma. He who has a powerful chariot like
this is a warrior who can conquer even that great and invin-
cible enemy — the world. Hearken unto me and fear not.’
That is the equipment,” added Gandhiji, that can lead us
to victory. I have not retired from the world, nor do I mean to.
1 am no recluse. I am content to do what little work I can in
Sevagram and give what guidance I can to those that come to
me. What we need is faith. And what is there to be lost in
following the right path ? The worst that can happen to us is
that we shall be crushed. Better to be crushed thaii to be
vanquished.
But if we had to equip ourselves violently, I should be
at my wit’s end. I cannot even think out an armament plan,
much less work it. On the other hand my non-violent plan
is incredibly simpler and easier, and with God as our Commander
and Infallible Guide where is there cause for any fear ?”
Sevagram, 21-8-40 M. D.
Hari^an^ 25-8-1940
AN INTERESTING DISCOURSE
n '
A Sister’s Questions
Now came questions of practical difficulty.
Q. May a non-violent man possess wealth, mid if he may,
how can he keep it non-violently ?”
A. “He may not own any wealth, though he may possess
millions. Let him hold it in trust. If he lives among dacoits *
and thieves, he may possess very little, indeed little beyond a
loin-cloth. And if he does this, he will convert them.
“But you must not generalize. In a non-violent State
there will be very few dacoits. For the individual the golden
rule is that he will own nothing. If I decided to settle and work
among the so-called criminal tribes, I should go to them without
any belongings and depend on them for iny food and shelter.
The moment they feel that I am in their fnidst in order to serve
them, they will be my friends. In that attitude is true ahinisa.
But I have discussed this question at length in a recent article
in Harijan,^^ '
Q, “ How is one to protect the honour of women ?”
A. “ I am afraid you do not read Harijan regularly. I dis-
cussed this question years ago, and have discussed it often since.
The question may be discussed under two heads : (1) how is a
woman to protect her own honour ? and (2) how are her male
relatives to protect it ?
“As regards the first question, where there is a non-violent
atmosphere, where there is the constant teaching of ahirasa,
woman will not regard herself as dependent, weak or helpless.
She is not really helpless when she is really pure. Her purity
makes her conscious of her strength. I have always held that it
is physically impossible to violate a woman against her will.
The outrage takes place only when she gives way to fear or
does nqt realize her moral strength. If she cannot meet the
assailant’s physical might, her purity will give her the strength
AN INTERESTING DISCOURSE
329
to die before he succeeds in violating her. Take the case of
Sita. Physical!^ she was a weakling before Ravana, but her
purity was more than a match even for his giant might. He
tried to win her with all kinds of allurements but could not
carnally touch her without her consent. On the other hand, if
a woman depends on her own physical strength or upon a
weapon she possesses, she is sure to be discomfited whenever
her strength is exhausted.
^^The second question is easily answered. The brother or
father or friend will stand between his protegee and her assail-
ant. He will then either dissuade the assailant from his wicked
purpose or allow himself to be killed by him in preventing him.
In so laying- down his life he will not only have done his duty,
but given a new accession of strength to his protegee who will
now know how to protect her honour.” ^
“But,*' said one of the sisters from Poona, “there lies the
rub. How is a woman to lay down her life ? Js it possible for
her to do so ? ”
“ Oh ! ” said Garidhiji, any day more possible for her than
for man. I know that women are capable of throwing away
their lives for a much lesser purpose. Only a few days ago a
* young girl of twenty burnt herself to death as she felt she was
being persecuted for refusing to go in for ordinary studies. And
she perished with such cool courage and determination T She
ignited her sari with an ordinary oil-light and did not so much
as raise a cry, so that the people in the neighbouring room were
unaware of the happening until all was over. I do not give
these details to commend her example, but to show how easily
woman can throw away her life. I at any rate am incapable of
this courage. But I agree that it is not the external light but
the inner light that is needed.”
The same sister wondered 'how one was to avoid anger and
violence altogether in dealing with children. “You know our
old adage,” said Gandhiji laughing heartily, “play with him
till he is five, hammer him for ten years, treat him as your friend
when he is sixteen.” “ But,” he added, “ don't you worry. If
you have to be angry with your child on occasions, I shall call
that anger noh-violent anger. I am speaking of wise mothers,
not the ignorant ones who do not deserve to be mothers.”
330
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AtH) WAR
Central TeacWng of the Gita
The discussion again took a serious turn with a challenging
question on the philosophy of the Gita : “ Is the central teaching
of the Gita selfless action or non-violence ? ”
“I have no doubt that it is nnasakti — selfless action.
Indeed I have called my little translation of the Gita Anasakti-
yoga. And anasakti transcends ahimsa. He who would be
anasakta (selfless) has necessarily to practise non-violence in
order to attain the state of selflessness. Ahimsa is, therefore,
a necessary preliminary, it is included in anasakii, it does not go
beyond it.”
“ Then does the Gita teach himsa and ahimsa both ? ”
I do not read that meaning in the Gita. It is quite likely
that the author did not write it to inculcate ahimsa, but as a
commentator dra^vs innumerable interpretations from a poetic
text, even so I interpret the Gita to mean that, if its central
theme is anasalcti, it also teaches ahimsa. Whilst we are in the
flesh and tread the solid earth, we have to practise ahimsa. In
the life beyond there is no himsa or ahimsa.^^
‘‘ But,” said Balasaheb Klher, “ Lord Krishna actually
counters the doctrine of ahimsa. For Arjuna utters this pacifist
resolve : ^
Better I deem it, if my kinsmen strike.
To face them weaponless, and bare my breast
To shaft and spear, than answer blow with blow.
And Lord Krishna teaches him to answer blow with blow.”
lYliat to Do ?
“ There I join issue Avith you,” said Gandhiji. “ Those words
of Arjuna were words of pretentious \visdom. ‘Until yester^
day/ says Klrishna to him, ‘you fought your kinsmen with
deadly weapons without the slightest compunction. Even today
you would strike if the enemy was a stranger and not 3’our own
kith and kin ! ^ The question before him was not of non-
violence, but whether he should slay his nearest and dearest.”
Again the questioners came down to solid earth, and began
to put questions about the Congress and the attitude of those
Who believed in complete non-\nolence. Gandhiji explained
that they should refrain till he gave the word. He wanted still
to plead ^vith the leaders who had passed the Poona resolution.
MY IDEA OF A POLICE FORCE
331
He expected to show them that the Congress would lose all its
prestige if they adhered to the new policy. But the question
had to be dealt with patiently. On the other hand it did not
matter even if the Congress resolution received no response. The
resolution was as good as enforced, when it was deliberately
passed, and their duty did not alter with refusal of the govern-
ment to respond. ‘‘Besides,” he added, “there is an inherent
flaw in the Poona resolution. It should be obvious to the
meanest understanding that, if you think that you cannot do
without arms in meeting foreign aggression, they would
a fortiori be needed in dealing with daily disturbances — inter-
necine feuds, dacoities and riots. For organized unarmed
resistance against an organized invasion is any day easier than
deliberate ahimsa in face of a dacoit who breaks into your
house at night. That calls for ahimsa of the highest type,”
Sevagram, 26-8-40
Harijan, 1-9-1940 M. D.
133
MY IDEA OF A POLICE FORCE
A friend writes as follows :
“The English sister, whom you recently quoted, rightly says
that efforts should always be made to stem external aggression
by non-violent means, and that present circumstances offer a
peculiarly suitable opportunity for demonstrating that it is
possible to secure better results through non-violence than
through armed force. But ahimsa as a weapon to counter
internal disorders presents difficulties. In our country there
can be three types of internal disturbances, viz. communal, in-
dustrial, and dacoities. The root causes of these are mutual
distrust, social injustice, and grinding poverty due to economic
exploitation and unemployment. So long as these causes exist,
the threefold disturbances^ will take place in spite of armed
forces. Your constructive programme is the only means of
removing these root causes. But it will take time. What is
to be done in the meantime ? Can non-violence solve the diflB-
culties ?
“Can we envisage an order of society in which we will
not have to resort to himsa in any form whatsoever ? Suppose
332
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
for argument's sake that there exists a society where the majo-
rity. does not possess goods that would excite em^ and where
everyone has the wherewithal to live contentedly. Even then
it does not seem possible that there will be no disputes over
proprietorship of land, lending and borrowing of money, and
other business dealings. For these, therefore, we must provide
the means of justice and see that the decisions of the courts
or arbitration boards are carried out. For this it will be essen-
tial to have a police force. You have yielded this point. But
I should like to know what restrictions you would place on the
police force. If there were a non-violent government in power
today, would it use the police force for quelling internal dis-
orders ? And are you willing to maintain it for all time or
only temporarily? My mind refuses to go so far as to envisage
a time when. a police force will be^a superfluity. There seems
to me to be no escape from placing this limitation, as it were,
on ahimsa,^'
The questions asked in this letter are of the utmost import-
ance and deserve notice. If true ahimsa had come into being
within us, and if our so-called satyagraJia movements had been
truly non-violent, these questions would not have arisen be-
cause they would have been solved.
For one who has never seen the arctic regions anamaginary
description of them, however elaborate, can convey but an
inadequate idea of the reality. Even so is it with ahimsa. If all
Congressmen had been true to their creed, we would not be
vacillating between violence and non-violence as we are toda3^
The fruits of ahimsa would be in evidence everywhere. There
would be communal harmony, the demon of untouchability
would have been cast out, and, generally speaking, we should
have evolved an ordered society. But the reverse is the case
just now. There is even definite hostility to the Congress in
certain quarters. The word of Congressmen is not always
relied on. The Muslim League and most of the Princes have no
faith in the Congress and are in fact inimical to it. If Con-
gressmen had true ahimsa in them, there would be none of this
distrust. In fact the Congress would be the beloved of all.
Therefore I can only place an imaginary picture before the
votaries of ahiTrisa.
So long as we are not saturated with pure ahimsa we cannot
possibly %vin Swaraj through non-violence. We can come into
power only when we are in a majority or, in other, words, when
NON-VIOLENCE OF THE BRAVE
835
advantage, if God be with us, or if you prefer, we have the skill
to do so. And such a thing has happened in India.
Arms are surely unnecessary for a training in dhimsa. In
fact the arms, if any, have to be thrown away, as the Khansaheb
did in the Frontier Province. Those who hold that it is essential
to learn violence before we can learn non-violence, would hold
that only sinners can be saints.
Just as one must learn the art of killing in the training for
violence, so one must learn the art of dying in the training for
non-violence. Violence does not mean emancipation from fear, but
discovering the means of combating the cause for fear. Non-vio-
lence, on the other hand, has no cause for fear. The votary of non-
violence has to cultivate the capacity for sacrifice of the highest
type in order to be free from fear. He recks not if he should lose
his land, his wealth, his life. He who has not overcome all fear
cannot practise ahirnsa to perfection. The votary of ahimsa has
only one fear, that is of God. He who seeks refuge in God ought
to have a glimpse of the Atman that transcends the body ; and
the moment one has a glimpse of the Imperishable Atman one
sheds the love of the perishable body. Training in non-violence
is thus diametrically opposed to training in violence. Violence
is needed for the protection of things external, non-violence is
needed for the protection of the Atman, for the protection of
one’s honotur.
This non-violence cannot be learnt by staying at home. It
needs enterprise. In order to test ourselves we should learn to
dare danger and death, mortify the flesh, and acquire the
■capacity to endure all manner of hardships. He who trembles
■or takes to his heels the moment he sees two people flghting is
not non-violent, but a coward. A non-violent person will lay
down his life in preventing such quarrels. The bravery , of the
non-violent is vastly superior to that of the violent. The badge
■of the violent is his weapon — spear, or sword, or rifle. God is
Ihe shield of the non-violent.
This is not a course of training for one intending to -learn
non-violence. But it is easy to evolve one from the principles I
have laid down.
It will be evident from the foregoing that there is no com-
parison between the two' tjqies of bravery. The one is limited,
336
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
the other is limitless. There is no such thing as out-daring or
out-fighting non-violence. Non-violence is invincible. There
need be no doubt that this non-violence can be achieved. The
history of the past twenty years should be enough to reassure
us.
Sevagram, 27-8-40
Harijan^ 1-9-1940
135
SINDH
The position of Congressmen in Sindh is by no means en-
viable. They have a most difBcult time before them. Their
non-violence, if they have it in them, has not benefited those
who live in fear of their lives. It is true that no one else has
helped them. I warned them at the very outset that they must
learn the art of helping themselves as others do, or non-
\dolence as Congressmen are supposed or expected to do. In
some places they are organizing national guards. Those who
look up to Congressmen for help and guidance. For the latter
have been their helpers and guides hitherto. Some Congressmen
feel that without any intention thenaselves of taking up arms
they can put courage into the people, if they train them in the
art of self-defence whether with or without' arms. The question
has attained importance and demands immediate answer in view
of the imequivocal resolution of the AJ.C.C. recently held at
Poona. I am quite clear that no Congressman, so long as he is
even a four anna member of the Congress, can take part in
organizing or aiding self-defence groups %vithout committing a
breach of the Poona resolution. But I am equally clear that it
is the duty of those Congressmen who feel the need for helping
self-defence groups and have the capacity for doing so, to go
to the rescue of the terror-stricken men. This they can
do by resigning their membership of the Congress. By do-
ing so they will enhance the prestige of the Congress and
ANOTHER DISCOURSE
their own usefulness. •• The fact that they feel the call to help is
the decisive factor in determining their course of action.
Sevagram, 28-8-40
Harijan, 1-9-1940
136
ANOTHER DISCOURSE
Bharatanandji, whose acquaintance the reader will make in
another column, demurred to the compliment given to his
countrymen, the Poles, by Gandhiji. “You say that the Poles
were ‘ almost non-violent I do not think so. There was black
hatred in the breast of Poland, and I do not think the compli-
ment is deserved.”
“You must not take what I say, so terribly literally. If
ten soldiers resist a force of a thousand soldiers armed cap-a-
pie, the former are almost non-violent, because there is no
capacity for anything like proportionate violence in them. But
the instance I have taken of the girl is more appropriate. A
girl who attacks her assailant with her nails, if she has grown
them, or with h^‘r teeth if she has them, is almost non-violent,
because there is no premeditated violence in her. Her violence
is the violence of the mouse against the cat.”
“ Well then, Bapuji, I will give you an instance. A young
Russian girl was attacked by a soldier. She used her nails and
teeth against him and tore him, so to say, to pieces.' Was she
almost non-violent ? ”
“ How can it cease to be non-violence, if offered on the spur
of the moment, simply because it was successful ? ” I interposed.
“No,” said Gandhiji almost inadvertently.
“Then I am really puzzled,’? said Bharatanandji. “You
say there should be no premeditated violence and no capacity
to offer proportionate violence. Here in this case she by her
success proved that she had the capacity.”
“ I am sorry,” said Gandhiji, “ that I inadvertently said
'.no ’ to Mahadev. There was violence' there. It was equally
matched.”
N. V.— 22
338
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
** But, then, is not intention ultimately" the test? A surgeon
uses his knife non-violently ; or a keeper of the peace uses force
against miscreants in order to protect society. That too he does
non-violently,” said Bharatanandji,
“ Who is to judge the intention ? Not we. And for us the
deed in most cases is the test. We normally look at the action
and not at the intention. God alone knows the intention.”
♦ “ Then God alone knows what is himsa and what is ahimsa.^^
“Yes, God alone is the final judge. It is likely that what
we believe to be an act of ahimsa is an act of himsa in the eyes
of God. But for us the path is chalked out. And then you must
know that a true practice of ahimsa means also in one who prac-
tises it the keenest intelligence and wide-awake conscience. It
is difficult for him to err. When I used those words for Poland,
and when I suggested to a girl believing herself to be helpless
that she might use her nails and teeth without being guilty of
violence, you must understand the meaning at 'the back of my
mind. There is the refusal to bend before overwhelming might
in the full knowledge that it' means certain death. The Poles
knew that they would be crushed to atoms, and yet they re-
sisted the German hordes. That was why I called it almost
non-violence.”
“But, Bapuji, I cannot somehow forget that it is God who
is the judge, and God permits violence. There is a Puranic
story I should like to tell you. God Shiva once suddenly dis-
appeared as he and Parvati were in the midst of a conversation.
But soon he appeared again. On being asked where he had
been, he said he had gone to the rescue of a hhakta who had
been attacked, but he had come back on finding that the bhahtu
had helped himself by striking his assailant ;^vith a stone.”
“Well, well, no amount of argument can teach us ahimsa.
And you must not forget that one cannot be sure of the purity
of one’s intention xmtil one has gone through the whole course
of spiritual training laid down by masters of yoga like Patan-
jali. / Perfect chittashuddhi (purification of mind) cannot be
achieved in any other way,”
Here Bharatanandji seemed to be at one with Gandhiji,
and he agreed that anyone might easily deceive himself. But
he came with another poser. “ Ahimsa^ brahmacharya, spinning
are all sadharias^^' he said, “and whereas one may suit one, it
ANOTHER DISCOURSE
389
may not suit another. Why have you made of ahimsa a imi-
versal precept ? ”
“When a means has been tried by a scientist and he has
found it of infallible effect he puts it before all. You know the
maxim ' w cT^TsT^^.’ What is true of the individual is
true of the imiverse.” ' *
“ But you lay down the same law for a saint and a robber ! ”
“The law is the same-; the way may be more difficult for
the robber than for the saint. The law is the ideal, no matter
how much individuals may fall short of the ideal.” '
“But you forget the reality before the ideal.”
“ No. The reality is always present before me, but my stri-
ving is always to reach the ideal. Euclid’s straight line exists
only in oiur conception, but we have always to postulate it. We
have always to strive to draw a true line corresponding to
Euclid’s imaginary line.”
As I listened to this I was put in mind of the exactly similar
words of Carlyle: “ Ideals can never be completely embodied
in practice. And yet it is never to be forgotten that ideals do
exist ; that if they be not approximated to at all, the whole
matter goes to wreck ! Infallibly. No bricklayer builds a wall
perfectly perpendicular ; mathematically this is not possible ;
a certain degree of perpendicularity suffices him; and he, like
a good bricklayer who must have done with his job, leaves it
so. And yet ' if he sways too much from^ the perpendicular ;
above aU if he throws a planet and level quite away from ,him,
and piles brick on brick heedless, just as it comes to hand —
such a bricklayer is in a bad way. He has forgotten himself ;
but the law of gravitation does not forget to act on him ; he
and his wall rush down into confused welter of ruin.”
Sevagram, 2-9-40
Harijan, 8-9-1940
M.D.
137
HOW TO QUENCH IT ?
Elsewhere in these columns the reader will see “ A
Seeker’s ” letter * in which he has asked a question which must
have occurred to everyone. The beauty lies in the way in
which he has introduced the question. He has depicted the
present conflagration in such lurid colours that violence cannot
but stink in our nostrils. The reader is sm*e instinctively to
‘exclaim : “ Even if it were possible to win the kingdom of the
world by means of such violence, I would not have it/’
But this exclamation will be of no avail to quench the con-
flagration. No doubt it wiU some day quench itself, but it
means mutual fratricidal slaughter like that of the Yadavas of
* “A SEEKER’S” QtJESTIOK
The Editor, Harijan
Sir,
You must be reading in the papers how the war between
Germany and England is being waged. Aeroplanes filled with
thousands of incendiary bombs do untold havoc, and news-
papers and broadcasts describe with pleasure the amount of
injury each side is able to inflict on the other. The general
public is consoled by being told that the damage done in the
enemy country is greater than what the enemy has done in
theiis. It is said that military objectives are the sole targets
of the raiders : but it is impossible to believe that, flying at
great heights and often through smoke screens, the bombers
can really take proper aim. And then we hear from both sides
of the ‘successful’ blockades, the object of which is to spread
famine ; and famine must necessarily, more than even bombs,
hurt the civilian population.
Is it impossible for these belligerents to think in terms of
humanity and stop this carnage ? How can any good ever come
out of war? And must we not, therefore, declare ourselves un-
reservedly against war for or against anybody or any ideology ? '
There must be many godly people in the warring countries
who think in this way but have not the strength to raise their
voice in protest. May we not help them to do so and at the
same time rouse the sleeping conscience of all thinking people ?
Yours
; -■ A Seeker
3t0
HOW TO QUENCH IT ?
341
old who destroyed themselves and relieved the earth of so much
burden. And such a consummation would any day be preferable
to a perpetual conflagration. But no one would wish for this.
What one would devoutly wish for is some brave step to stop
the conflagration before there is total destruction. This can
only be a non-violent step. How and when it can be taken
has to be discovered. The Seeker ”• will be satisfied when the
discovery is made. In my opinion the discovery has already
been made. If India can win Swaraj non-violently even while
this conflagration is going on, the latter is bound to be ex-
tinguished by that one event. That being my firm faith I fought*
the Wardha resolution tooth and nail, and secured my freedom
— not indeed to tickle my vanity but for the success of the
experiment. And if I have to forego this freedom — as is quite
likely — it will be for the same purpose.
We read in our religious books that whenever, in the days
of old, all ordinary means failed to secure release from an or-
deal or a calamity, people resorted to tapasya (penance), i.e.
actually burnt themselves. I do not regard these stories as
legendary. Tapasya is of various kinds. Misguided men can
resort to it, as we find them doing today. The wise also can
do it. It is worth while understanding the implication of
tapasya. It was by dint of tapasya that Western scientists made
their discoveries; Tapasya does not simply consist of betaking
oneself to the forest and sitting down there surrounded by blaz-
ing fires. That tapasya may even be the height of folly. We
have, therefore, to discriminate.
The question asked by Seeker” does not arise out of des- -
pair. It is intended to quicken the conscience of those who be-
lieve in ahimsa. I have already shown the way. It is the fulfil-
ment of the thirteenfold constructive programme described in a
recent article. Those who will carry it out in faith, in full know-
ledge, and without the slightest fuss, will have done their share
in the tapasya to quench the conflagration. They will achieve
two ends at the same time. They will make India free, and will
also quench the conflagration. It is likely that the number of
such people is limited, so limited that it can have no effect. I have
maintained that, even if there is one individual who is almost
completely non-violent, he can put out the conflagration. But I
have suggested a tapasya which can easily be performed by the
342
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
average individual. In this age of democracy it is essential.that
desired results are achieved by the collective effort of the people*
It will no doubt be good to achieve an objective through the
effort of a supremely powerful individual, but it can never make
the community conscious of its corporate strength. An indi-
viduaFs success will be like a millionaire doling free food to
millions of starving people. We shpuld, therefore, bend our'
energies to a fulfilment of the thirteenfold constructive pro-
gramme. It may or may not bring Swaraj, but we shall surely
have the satisfaction of having done our best.
There is a warning in the “Seeker’s’’ letter to which I should
like to draw the reader’s attention. He says papers and broad-
casts describe with devihsh pleasure the amount of injury each
is able to inflict upon the other, and suggests that such news
should sicken people instead of providing pleasure, if they are
to take part in the propagation of peace. I agree. .Such people
will not be able to carry out even the constructive programihe,
for they will have no faith in it.
However that may be, it is as clear as daylight that, if this
conflagration is to be put out through non-violent effort, it will
be done only by India.
Sevagram, 2-9-40
Harijan, 8-9-1940
138
CONGEESS AHIMSA
I am being inundated with letters complaining that by giv-
ing my definition of ahimsa before the Poona Congressmen,
who saw me recently at Wardha, I have seriously circumscribed
the scope of ahimsa. These friends forget that my remarks
were confined to Congress ahimsa only. Personally I would not
kill insects, scorpions or even snakes. Nor would I under any
circumstance take meat. But I may not impose the creed of such
ahimsa on the Congress. The Congress is not a religious insti-
tution; it is a political organization. Its non-violence is limited
to human beings. If it were to be further extended, only Hindus,
and among even them only Vaishnavas and Jains, would be left
to participate in it. Millions of Hindus who eat fish and meat,
would be excluded. My proposition, to my mind, is so simple
and straight that I never thought that anybody could object to it.
My critics should further understand that many Mussal-
mans have not accepted even the limited ahimsa of the Congress
as their creed, and that the Congress itself has, by its Wardha
and Poona resolutions, so cramped its scope as to render it
almost meaningless. It follows, therefore, that any attempt to
Widen its scope as to include the sub-human species, will defeat
its purpose. Unlimited ahimsa will take time to be universa-
lized. We will have ample cause to congratulate ourselves, if
we learn to substitute the law of love in society for that of the
jungle, and if, instead of harbouring ill-will and enmity in our
bosoms against those whom we regard as our enemies, we learn
to love theni as actual and potential friends. It should be
remembered too that mere jivadaya (kindness to animals) does
not enable us to overcome the ‘six deadly enemies’ within us,
namely lust, anger, greed, infatuation, pride and falsehood. Give
me the man who has completely conquered self and is fixU of
goodwill and love towards all, and is ruled by the law of love ^
in all his actions, and I for one will offer him my respectful
homage even though he be a meat-eater. On the other hand the
ju?adaya of a person who is steeped in anger and lust but daily
\
343
344 NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
feeds the ants and insects and refrains from killing has hardl}’’
anjdhing in it to recommend itself. It is a mechanical perform-
ance without any spiritual value. It may even be w'orse — a
hypocritical screen for hiding the corruption within.
Sevagram, 9-9-40
Karijan, 15-9-1940
139
NON-VIOLENCE DURING RIOTS
A friend writes :
“ How can non-violence be efficacious during riots ? By
self-immolation we can influence only those with whom we
have already established li\dng contacts. But the hooligans who
perpetrate violence during riots are, as a rule, hirelings im-
ported from outside. How can they have any scruples about
hurting those whom they have never known before and for
whom they can have no regard or consideration ? ”
The question deserv^es careful consideration. The friend
who has put it is a valiant worker who nearly lost his life in
trying to do his duty during a riot. I have often written on this
question before. The pity of it is that Congressmen have never
seriously thought over the question of finding a non-\ioIent way
of quelling riots. Their non-\dolence was restricted to the sole
purpose of offering chdl resistance to the authorities. In my opi-
nion the non-\dolence that goes so far and no further scarcety
deserves the name ‘ aliiTnsa \ You may, if you like, call it un-
armed resistance. So far as it is a derice for embarrassing the
Government it is a species of himsa. To quell riots non-riolentty,
there must be true ahimsa in one’s heart, an ahimsa that takes
even the erring hooligan in its w^rm embrace. Such an attitude
cannot be cultivated. It can only come as a prolonged and
patient effort which must be made during peaceful times. The
would-be member of a peace brigade should come into close
touch and cultivate acquaintance \rith the so-called goonda ele-
ment in his vicinity. He should know all and be known to all
and win the hearts of all by his firing and selfless ser\ice. No
section should be regarded as too contemptible or mean to mb:
SPEECH AT THE A.I.C.C.
845
■with. Goondas do not drop from the sky, nor do they spring
from the earth like evil spirits. They are the product of social
•disorganization, and society is therefore responsible for their
existence. In other words, they should be looked upon as a
symptom of curruption in our body politic. To remove the dis-
ease we must first discover the underlying cause. To find the
remedy wiU then be a comparatively easy task. So far we, have
not even attempted a proper beginning. But it is never too late
to mend. It is enough that we are at last alive to the necessity
of it. We have now to follow it up with prompt action. Let
everyone who is interested make a prompt beginning in his own
neighbourhood. The difficulty mentioned by my correspondent
will automatically resolve itself, if we proceed with our effort in
the right spirit.
Sevagram, 9-9-40
Harijan, 15-9-1940
140
SPEECH AT THE A. I. C. C. '
[Here is the full text of Gandhiji’s English speech at the
A. I. C. C. meeting in Bombay on 15th September. It is revised
by Gandhiji and is thus an authorised version. M.D.]
I know that you have listened to me with the greatest
patience. I am specially grateful to you today, for the simple
reason that I have said many things which may have displeased
you. But it was never my intention to displease those whom I
want to harness for the great work-that lies before you and before
me. I have to speak to you at length because I have to shoulder
this burden. I have not come with a prepared speech at all. The
thoughts will come as I proceed.
Let me begin with a thought which has been weighing with
me for a considerable time. When the war broke out and I went
to Simla to see the Viceroy, I issued a statement the next day,
not in a representative but in my individual capacity. A friend
has now reminded me how good it would have -heen if I had
simply hung on to that statement although I could not take the
Congress with me; and on the eve of my shouldering this respoh-
346
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
sibility, he prayed that I should be guided by God to take up that
original position and retire. I have very great regard for him.
I have not forgotten that statement, nor have I any regret or
apology to offer. If such a thing occurs — and history often re-
peats itself — and I happen to go to another Viceroy, I should
make the same statement.
Although I spoke only for myself, deep down in me there
was the Congressman speaking. The Viceroy also did not send for
me because I was M. K. Gandhi. M. K. Gandhi has absolutely
no place in his books. The man who wields the sceptre can have
no room for individuals. He sent for me because he thought I
would represent the Congress vie\^ and I would be able to carry
conviction to Congressmen.
I withdrew from that position, not as an individual but as a
Congressman, and because I failed to carry conviction even to a
single Congressman, Happily you have got on the Working Com-
mittee men with sterling honesty who had the courage to tell me
that, although it was my statement, they did not feel like accept-
ing it. They added that they had had bitter experience behind
them, and that therefore they would not be able to take that posi-
tion. Thus you had the resolution that was passed by the Con-
gress immediately after the war. And I agreed with the resolu-
tion as a representative, although I said to them that, if I could
carry conviction, my original position was the best possible one to
take up. If I had pressed the members of the Working Committee
to accept my position, they would have done so, but it would
have been only mechanical. The statement was not made to
deceive the Viceroy or, for the matter of that, a single soul. It
came straight from the heart. It was not a theatrical display. It
was the opening up of the secret recesses of the heart before
the world, the Viceroy and the Congress. If these words of mine
could not find an echo in their hearts, they would have been of
no use whatsoever to the Viceroy, to the great English nation or
to India. That still remains my sentiment. If I could not con-
vince the Congress of my attitude, it would not carry us further.-
It would have been a wrong step to take, and hence it was not
taken. With that background I approach this resolution.
I have made repeated statements that I would not be guilty
of embarrassing the British people or the British Government
when their very existence hung in the balance, that I would not
. SPEECH AT THE A.I.C.C.
347
be true to my satyagraha, would not be true to non-violence,
would not be true to the truth which I hold dear if I did so, and
therefore could not do so. That very man now stands before
you to shoulder the burden of satyagraha. Why ? There comes
a time when a man in his weakness mistakes vice for virtue; and
virtue itself, when taken away from its context and from the pur-
pose for which it was dedicated, becomes vice, I felt that, if I
did not go to the assistance of the Congress and take the helm
even if it be in fear and trembling, I would be untrue to myself.
I feel that in taking the step that we are doing we are
rendering a great service not only to the Congress but to the
whole of India. And we are rendering a seiwice not only to the
whole of India, History will record — and Englishmen will be
able to grasp this statement some day — that we rendered help
to the English nation, and they will find that we were, true to
our salt and had the same' bravery and fearlessness of which
the Englishman is proud and for which he is renowned. I, who
claim to be a fast friend of the British people, will be guilty of
unfriendly conduct if, under a false sense of modesty, or because
people may think otherwise about me, or because Englishmen
themselves will be angry with me, I do not issue a warning that
the vittue of self-restraint now becomes vice, because it wiU lull*
the Congress organization, and it will kill the very spirit which
is exercising this restraint.
When I say, I am speaking not only for the Congress, but
for all who stand for national freedom — Muslims, Parsis, Christ-
ians and even those who are against the Congress, so long as they
represent the aspiration of India, namely unadulterated inde-
pendence, I should be untrue to all of them, if at this time I
said, ‘no embarrassment to the British’. I must not repeat
parrot-like ‘ no embarrassment ’. Then that repetition would be
just as useful for my salvation or for the -guarding of my virtue
as the repetition by a parrot of God’s name which cannot bring
him salvation, because it is only a mechanical and vocal effort
without any intelligence behind it. Therefore, if I exercise that
« suppression at this critical moment in the history of the nation,
it would be useless. I should be perfectly untrue to myself if I
hid myself in Sevagram and said, “No, I have told you, ‘no
embarrassment.’ ”
The language of this resolution is in the main mine. It
548
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
appealed to Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru. I used to be the Con-
gress draftsman. Now he has taken my place. He saw it was
inevitable, if we were to be true to non-violent resistance to the
extent to which we wanted to go. The Working Committee has
accepted this phraseology deliberately, well knowing its impli-
cations. The result is this : If we can get a declaration from
the British Government that the Congress can carry on anti-war
propaganda, and preach non-co-operation with the Government
in their war effort, we will not have chdl disobedience.
V I do not want England to be defeated or humiliated. It
hurts me to find St. Paul’s Cathedral damaged. It hurts
me as much as I would be hurt if I heard that the Kashi
Vishvanath temple or the Juma Masjid was damaged. I would
like to defend both the Kashi Vishvanath temple and the Juma
Musjid and even St. Paul’s vnth my life, but would not take a
single life for their defence. That is my fundamental difference
with the British people. My sympathy is there with them
nevertheless. Let there be no mistake on the part of English-
men, Congressmen, or others whom my voice reaches, as to
where my sympathy lies. It is not because I love the British
nation and hate the German. I do not think that the Germans
as a nation are any worse than the English or the Italians are
any worse. We are all tarred with the same brush ; we are all
members of the vast human family. I decline to draw any dis-
tinctions. I cannot claim any superiority for Indians. We have
the same virtues and the same vices. Humanity is not divided
into watertight compartments so that we cannot go from one
to another. They may occupy one thousand rooms, but the3»’
are all related to one another. I would not say, * India should
be all in all, let the whole world perish.’ That is not my mes-
sage. India should be all in all, consistently with the well-being
of other nations of the world. I can keep India intact and its
freedom also intact only if I have goodwill towards the whole
of the human family and not merely for the human family which
inhabits this little spot of the earth called India. It is big enough
compared to other smaller nations, but what is India in the #
wide world or in- the universe ?
Let there be no mistake as to what I am about. I want my
indhnduality to remain unimpaired. If I lose it, I would be of •
no service to India, much less to the British people, still less
SPEECH AT THE AJ.C.C. 84{>
to humanity. My individual liberty is the same as the nation’s,
convertible with national liberty. I do not claim any greater
liberty for myself. Hence my liberty is equal to the liberty
of all of you and no greater. I feel that, if my liberty
is at stake, yours is also at stake. I claim the- liberty of going
through the streets of Bombay and say that I shall have nothing
to do with this war, because I do not believe in this war and in
this fratricide that is going on in Europe. I admire the bravery.
But what is the use of this bravery ? I deplore the foolishness
and the crass ignorance. These people do not know what they*
are fighting for. That is how I look at this war that is going
on across the seas. I cannot possibly take part in it. Nor do I
want the Congress to do so.
The part that I would like to take is the part of peacemaker.
If the British people in their wisdom had recognized the inde-
pendence not of the Congress but of aU India, and if other
parties in India had also co-operated with, us, we would have
taken the honoiurable . place of peacemakers between these'
nations. Such is my ambition. But today I know that it is a.
day-dream. But sometimes a man lives in his day-dr,eams. I
live in mine, and picture the world as full of good human beings
— not goody goody human beings. In the Socialist’s language,
there will be a new structxire of society, a new order of things,
I am also aspiring after a new order of things that wiU astonish
the world. If you try to dream these day-dreams, you will alsO'
feel exalted as I do.
And now I come to our ‘ tin-pot ’ Congress — tin-pot in the-
estimation of others, ^not my own. If we do not take care, the
Congress will disappear, and if the Congress disappears, the
national spirit disappears. One after another Congressmen are
being selected and jailed. It is not satyagrdha to watch people
being taken away. It is much better for all of us to rush into
the jaws of the opponent. After all, as the Maulana Saheb once
said,' India is a vast prison. Let us get out of this slave-prison^
by breaking the prison bars. He said to the Sikhs at the time
of the Nankana Saheb tragedy : “You may protect one guru-
dwara ; but what about vast gurudwara that is India ? We have
to deliver it from bondage.” Those words ring true even today
in my ears. If this liberty of the nation or the movement for
freedom is likely to be choked, then I say that the virtue of self-
350
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
restraint is going to become a vice. That virtue of restraint
cannot be carried to the extent of the extinction of the national
spirit wherever it may reside, whether among Congressmen or
non-Congressmen.
I do not want to hurl civil disobedience or anything in the
face of the (Government without making my meaning clear, the
meaning I attach to the sum total of Government actions —
actions beginning with the declaration of the Viceroy, the state-
ment of the Secretary of State for India, and the series of actions
and the policy that the Government have pursued since. The
sum total of all these has left an indelible impression on my mind
that there is something wrong, some injustice beihg perpetrated
against the whole nation, and that the voice of freedom is about
to be stifled. This is implied in the resolution, Jiot in the exact
language which I am using now, but you will see the meaning
clear as daylight.
In order completely to clarify our position, I propose to'
approach the Viceroy with a request that Jie will be good enough
to see me, and I have no doubt that he ^vilL I %vill place my
difficulties before him ; I will place the Congress difficulties
before him.' I ^v^ll approacih him in your name. I
will tell him that this is the position to which we have been
reduced : We do not want to embarrass you and deflect you
from your purpose in regard to war effort. We go our way,
and you go yoms, tmdeterred, the common ground being non-
violence. If we carry the people with us, there wiU be no war
effort on the part of our people. If, on the other hand, without
your using any but moral pressure, you find that the' people
help the war effort, we can have no cause for grumbling. If
you get assistance from the Princes, from the Zamindars, from
an3’’body high or low,Vou can have it ; but let our voice also be
heard. If you accept my proposal, it will be eminently honour-
able, it will certainly be a feather in your cap. It will be honour-
able of you, although you are engaged in a life and death
struggle, that you have given us this liberty. It \vill be honour-
able of you that you take this great step, although you have
limitless powers to choke Our voice ; and that you give us the
fullest possible freedom, consistently with the obsen’-ance of
non-violence, to tell' the people of India not to join the war
effort.
SPEECH AT THE A.I.C.C.
351
Let the people use any reasoning they like for refusal to help
the war effort. My reasoning is the only one which will sit well
on Congressmen's lips. But I do not expect all to restrict them-
selves to that reasoning. Those who have conscientious objec-
tion, as I have, will adopt my reasoning. Those who are tired of
British imperialism will use that argument. There may be
others who will have other arguments. All these should be
•covered under this freedom of speech, provided, however, that
they all accept non-violence, provided also that what they say
is said openly and not secretly. These are the implications of
my generalship. If these do not satisfy you, you must reject
this resolution summarily. So long as you can preach non-
co-operation with war effort in men and money, there should be
no civil disobedience. But if you have not that liberty, there is
no Swaraj but perpetual bondage. I would like the British
people and the Viceroy to be able to tell the world that they
have given the leaders of the Indian people liberty to preach to
their people what they like. The British can then say to the
world ; “ Judge us by our conduct. Here in India we are pla^dng
the game.’*
I do not mind the British not responding to the Delhi reso-
lution. They may say, “At the present moment you cannot
interfere with the management of affairs as they stand. Deli-
verance will come to you in its own time. At this critical junc-
ture do not worry us.” I will tmderstand that argument. I will
sympathize with it. I will hold my hand so long as there is no
fraud or falsity in what they say. It is impossible for them to
give us freedom. If freedom has got to come, it must be obtained
by our own internal strength, by our closing our ranks, by unity
between all sections of the community. It cannot descend from
heaven, nor can it be given as a gift from one nation to another.
I do not know whether I am representing the feelings of the
members of the Working Committee, because I have not dis-
cussed these things with them. But you have to take me with
all my limitations,' with the workings of my mind.
The Viceroy may say/ ^‘You are a wsionary.” I may fail in my
mission, but we will not quarrel. If he says he is helpless, I will
not feel helpless. I will make good my position. I cannot sit
still when I see Ram Manohar Lohia and Jaiprakash Narain in
jail, than whom I do not know braver or straighter men. They
352
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
have not preached violence, but simply carried out the behests
of the Ramgarh resolution. It was a point of honour with them.
I have restrained myself, and will restrain myself. I will
not seek imprisonment. I do not want to offer civil disobedience.
I will not place myself in peril. In this battle I will not expose
myself to imprisonment. But if the Government chooses, it will
not be difficult to take me away. I will not be able to seal my
lips or restrain my pen. It will be difficult for them to keep me
in prison, not because India will rise in rebellion. India will be
wrong, if it does so. My own instinct is that they will not be
able to keep me in jail.
I will place my argument before the Viceroy. I may fail
in my mission. But I have never approached a mission in des-
pair. I may have approached it with the consciousness that I
may be faced with a blind wall. But I have often penetrated
blind walls. I shall approach the Viceroy in the confidence and
hope that he will understand the great reasonableness of the
request of the Congress for full liberty to preach ‘ no war ’ in
India. Every one should have perfect liberty to preach by pen
and tongue : ‘ We cannot aid imperialism, we cannot help
spoliation.’
I shall strain every nerve to avoid satyagralia in your name.
What shape it will take, when it comes, I do not know. But I
know that there will be no mass civil disobedience, because
mass civil disobedience is not required for this occasion. I have
impenetrable darkness before me regarding the future course of
action. I have no mysteries. I do not know how I shall lead
you, what action I shall put before you. I hope that any action
that we may take will be worthy of the Congress traditions and
of the occasion.
I have often said that I do not know the Congress mind as
I have buried myself in Sevagram. It is because of the Congress
difficulty that I have dragged myself to Bombay, and imme-
diately I am released from this duty you will find me in Seva-
gram. But I have got strength and resourcefulness enough to
lead this battle, although I am buried in Sevagram. I shall do
better and clearer thinking in Sevagram than anywhere else,
simply because I have built up there an atmosphere for my
growth. With the march of time my body must decay but, I
hope, not my wisdom. I seem to see things more clearly with
SPEECH AT THE AJ.C.C.
353
the advance of age. It may be self-deception, but there is no
hypocrisy. Self-deception is good sometimes in that it helps
one to remain cheerful and not to give way to despair. It will
be, therefore, wrong of you to drag me from Sevagram ; and I
promise that I shall give a good accoimt of my stewardship.
There are many parties in the Congress, We are not all of
the same opinion. There is indiscipline in the Congress. I know
it is inevitable- in a mass’ organization which is growing from
day to day. If it is all indiscifjline and no discipline, the organi-
zation is on the downward path. Let it not be said of you that
you come to the Congress although you do not believe in non-
violence. How can you possibly sign the Congress pledge with
violence in your breasts ? I want complete obedience to the
policy of non-violence. While the policy lasts, it is the same as
though it was a creed, for so long as it holds good it is as good
as a creed. My creed holds me for life ; yours so long as you
hold it. Resign from the Congress, and you ate free from it.
Let us be clear regarding the language we use and the thoughts
we nurture. For, what is language but the expression of
thought ? Let your thought be accurate and truthful, and you
will hasten the advent of Swaraj even if the whole world is .
against you. You will have won Swaraj without having to
spend nine million pounds a day or withput burning a single
home. If you are true to your policy, I am sure that without
doing any of these things you will build up the majestic edifice
of freedom.
^ Now for the violence party. Do not mix up the methods,
if you can help it. You have restrained yourselves for some
years. Restrain yourselves for some more years. Ours is not
a small battle. If you restrain yourselves, you will lose nothing.
Freedom of speech and pen is the foundation of Swaraj. If
the foundation-stone is in danger, you have to exert the whole
of your might in order to defend that single stone. May God
help you. , h
Harijan, 29-9-1940
N.V. 23
141
I WAS UNJUST BECAUSE WEAK
I know Eajaji enough to understand thaVhe is too brave
to need any support from anybody; he is too philosophic to
harbour an injury for many hours, if not minutes. I know also
that his fine sense of humour enables him to enjoy a joke at his
expense. Therefore this confession must be taken as one for
my own satisfaction only.
I have told the public that, had I not egged him on, Rajaji
would never have brought forward his resolution at New Dellii.
Having great regard for his judgment and his honesty, when he
asserted vdth amazing assurance that I was wrong and he was
right in the implications and application of non-violence, I
allowed myself to doubt the correctness of my interpretation to
the point of allowing and encouraging him to act on his. I
showed weakness and became unjust to him. A weak man is
just by accident. A strong but non-violent man is imjust by
accident. I was imjust to Rajaji because I exposed him to ridi-
cule and unkind attacks. Though no ultimate harm has come
to the Congress because what I stiU consider was an error has
been rectified, it is not a good thing for a great leader to have
his work undone all of a sudden, for I know that Rajaji still
feels that he was right. If his view had prevailed, the resolution
that now holds sway would not have taken the shape it has. I
would still have been out of the Congress. For I was out of it
at Wardha before the Delhi resolution was taken as the natural
outcome of Wardha.
If I was unjust to Rajaji, I was also unjust to the Working
Committee. For had I remained firm, the Wardha resolution
too would not have been passed. I hold that, so long as I am
accepted as the sole authority on satyagraha and its implica-
tions, they must not be a matter of vote. My colleagues may
debate the pros and cons vnih me and try to convince me that
their interpretation is right. If I cannot accept it, my judgement
should prevail, because I am both the author of satyagraha and
general in satyagraha action. The only way the colleagues can
354
I WAS UNJUST BECAUSE WEAK
855
avoid my judgment is by absolving me from guidance. They
did in so many words at Wardha. But it is plain that the abso-
lution was not what the world means. They were most imwill-
ing to give me absolution. It was given because I wrvmg it
from them. My weakness began at Wardha. When a serious
crisis arose, I should have raised the issue of jurisdiction. It
was outside the Working Committee’s jurisdiction to decide upon
the meaning and application of a matter which belonged to their
expert who was their interpreter and executive officer.
I am aware that aU the members of the Working Committee
d© not accept my opinion as to jurisdiction. The matter has not
come up for decision. But before the Committee and I came to
the resolution now before the coimtry, I had made the confes-
sion I have now published for the sake of an esteemed co-worker.
It is my conviction that, owing to a series of fortunate
combination of acts of the members at the last Wardha meeting,
the present resolution was conceived, and w'e have been saved
from a national disaster. We have come to a decision which, if
Congressmen react to it as they should, must raise India to a
position which it has never yet occupied, and brings it nearer to
her goal as nothing else could have done.
Whether my estimate is right or wrong time alone can show.
But this is merely by the way. Nor is the purpose of this confes-
sion to invite the reader to accept my judgment as to the juris-
diction of the Working Committee. The mention of it was rele-
vant to show the nature of my error. It is tmpardonable for a
general to surrender his judgment to a fellow officer unless the
conviction goes home to him that the latter is right — not may
be right.
I hope I have given the public enough material to show
that" in all that Rajaji did he was throughout brave and correct.
The incorrectness was due to me.
. And I wish to say the same thing about his ‘ sporting offer ’.
It is no part of this confession to defend it. But so far as I can
see, the offer was truly sporting, if the correctness 4f the Poona
resolution be accepted. It should be remembered that the Mus-
lim League is a great organization wielding influence upon the
I Muslims of India. The Congress has dealt with -it before, and
I have no doubt it will deal with It in future. However mistaken ’
Quaid-e-Azam may be in our estimation, let us give him the
.»
356
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAB
same credit for honesty of" purpose as we claim, for ourselves.
When the war cloud is lifted and when India comes to her o^vn,
surely Congressmen would just as much welcome a Muslim, a
Sikh, a Christian, or a Parsi as Premier, as they would a Hindu,
and even a non-Congressman, no matter of what faith he may
be. I am sirre that Rajaji’s ‘ sporting offer ’ meant no more and
no less than this. When passions have died, critics will read
his offer in its proper light. It is wrong to misjudge a public
worker, and doubly so when he happens to be of Rajaji’s cahbre.
He has lost 'nothing by the misjudgment. But a nation may
easily harm itself by misjudging its true servants and denying
itseff their services. Above all, when the Congress may have to
embark upon a great non-violent struggle for frmdamental
liberty, it behoves Congressmen to guard against harsh, hasty
and uncharitable judgments.
On the train to Wardha, 18-9-40
Harijan, 22-9-1940 '
142
SOME CRITICISM ANSWERED
The recent resolution of the A. I. C. C. and my speeches
before the meeting have come in for much criticism, if they have
earned some praise. Of the criticism there are two items which
I must attempt to answer. For they are of permanent interest.
The Times of India of the 17th inst. in its temperate criticism
takes me to task for my statement that ‘ the peoples of Europe
do not know what they are fighting for’. It was boimd to be
resented. But truth, though seemingly harsh, has to be uttered
when utterance becomes relevant, indeed imperative. I believe
that the utterance had become overdue. I must say why I
think that the warring nations do not know what they are
fighting for. I had used the expression ‘warring nations’, not
‘ peoples of Europe ’. This is not a distinction without a differ-
ence. I have distinguished between the nations and their
leaders. The leaders of comse know what they are fighting
for. I make no admission that they are right. But neither the
SOME CRITICISM ANSWERED
357
English nor the Germans nor the Italians know what they are
fighting for except that they trust their leaders and therefore
follow them. I submit that this is not enough when the stake
is so bloody and staggering as during the present war. It is per-
haps common cause that Germans and Italians do not know
why English children should be slaughtered in cold blood and
beautiful English homes should be destroyed. But The Times^
claim probably is that the British people know what they are
fighting for. When I asked the British soldiers in South Africa
during the Boer War they could not tell me what they were
fighting for. ‘ Theirs’ was surely ' not to reason why They did
not. even know where they were being marched to. The British,
people would not be able to give me a more satisfying answer, if
I happened to be in London and asked them why their soldiers
were working havoc in Berlin, If the,, Press accounts are to be
relied upon, British skill and valour have wrought more havoc
in Berlin than have the Germans in London. What ’wrong
have the German people done to the British people ? Their
leaders have. Hang them by all means, but why destroy Ger-
man homes and German civilian life ? What difference does it
make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the
mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism
or the holy name of liberty or democracy ? I assert in all humi-
lity, but with all the strength at my command, that liberty and
democracy become unholy when their hands are dyed red with
innocent blood. ’ I hear the living Christ saying : “ These so-
called children of mine know not what they are doing. They
take my Father’s name in vain, for they disobey the central com-
mand of my Father !” If my ears do not deceive, I have erred
in good company, if I have erred at all. -
And why have I uttered the truth ? Because I am confident
that God has made me the instrument of showing the better
way. If Britain seeks justice, she must appear before - the
imperial court of God with clean hands. She will not defend
liberty and democracy by following totalitarian methods so far
"as war is concerned. She w^ not be able to retrace her steps
after out-Hitlering Hitler in war. The last war is a resounding
le^on. Her victory, if attained, will be a snare and a delusion.
I know mjne is a voice in the wilderness. But it will some day
ring true. If liberty and democracy are to be truly saved,, they
358
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
\vill only be by non-violent resistance no less brave, no less
glorious, than violent resistance. And it will be infinitely
braver and more glorious because it will give life without
taking any.
Now I come to The Statesman's article of 18th September.
I am sorry to say it is intemperate and written in anger. It is
full of palpable mistakes (to use a mild word), no doubt im-
conscious. But I am not concerned with the intemperance of
language. In the fierce heat of battle unknown before, the won-
der is that the intemperance one sees sometimes is not much
greater than it is.
Here is the cream of the heavy indictment :
‘‘ We have often expressed our view about the fundamental
immorality and contradictory character of the doctrine. Non-
co-operation is a method of war and not of peace It carries
with it a pretentious claim to spiritual value which involves
sanctimonious insincerities and mass hypocrisy masking inten-
sified hatreds. ... A nation which accepted this doctrine would
doom itself to slavery.”
This is all contrary to the history of our own times in India.
I claim that there is nothing immoral in non-violent non-
co-operation. Violent resistance is itself non-co-operation, and it
is immoral because of its violence. It becomes moral when
it is non-violent. Non-co-operation with evil is a sacred duty.
It is essentially spiritual because of its non-violent character.
The adjectives used by the writer would be deserved, if it was
non-violent in name only. For the present argument I must
take the genuine article. Now for the facts. Non-violent non-
co-operation, however imperfect it was, has redeemed India at
least somewhat from the slavery tmder which she was groaning.
It has raised India from the slough of despond, and has brought
her prestige which nothing else could have. I make bold to
say that, if the non-violence offered had been not adulterated,
its effect would have been still more visible. My greatest claim,
however, is that it is this despised non-\iolent resistance whichC>
hitherto saved India from anarchy and red ruin. It is not yet
entirely saved. If it is to be saved, it will only be by the non-
vioTient method. I invite The Statesman \vriter to test the truth
of my statement. He will have many infallible proofs in its
VICEROy-GANDHI CORRESPONDENCE 359
support A dispassionate study will enable him to serve both
Britain and India*
On the way to Simla, 25-9-40
Harijan, 29-9-1940
^143
VICEROY-GANDHI CORRESPONDENCE
The correspondence that passed today between the Viceroy
and Gandhiji on the Congress demand for freedom of speech
has been released to the Press (Simla, September 30) :
Viceroy’s Letter
Dear Mr. Gandhi,
I think it will be convenient if I record very briefly in
v/riting the origin of the talks we have had on the 27th and 30th
September and their outcome.
As you will remember, you wrote to me on the 18th Sep-
tember to ask that I should grant you an interview, and you
explained in your letter that you were anxious to discuss the
situation covered by the recent resolution of the All-India Con-
gress Committee, not only in your capacity as guide of the
Congress but as a personal friend. I was, I need not say, most
ready to talk things over with you, and we have now had the
advantage of two conversations.
In the course of these conversations the situation has been
exhaustively discussed, wdth particular reference to the ques-
tion of free speech in time of war. On that matter, while pro-
fessing yourself most anxious to avoid in any way embarrassing
His Majesty’s Government in the prosecution of the war, you
made it clear to me that you regarded it as essential that the
Indian National Congress and other members of the public
.should be in a position to give full expression to their vie^vs in
relation to the war effort, provided only that such expression
was fully non-violent.
I indicated to you the nature of the special treatment laid
down by law in the United Kingdom for dealing with conscien-
tious objector — which I may broadly describe as an arrangement
360
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
under which, while the conscientious objector is absolved
from the duty of fighting and is allowed even to profess his
faith in public, he is not permitted to carry his opposition to
the length of endeavouring to persuade others, whether soldiers
or munition workers, to abandon their allegiance or to discon-
tinue their effort.
You made it clear to me that you would not regard treat-
ment of that nature as adequate in the conditions of India, and
that you regarded it as essential that in India, where in your
judgment conditions were wholly different from those existing
in Great Britain, the Indian objector, either to all war as such,
or to the participation of India in the present war, should be
untranunelled in the expression of his views.
It emerged further from our conversation that, while you
would not yourself preach to workers engaged on war work at
the actual works, in an endeavour there to dissuade them from
working on war equipment, you would regard it as essential
that it should be open to Congressmen and non-Congressmen
alike to deliver addresses and otherwise to call upon people
throughout the country to refrain from assisting India’s war
effort in any way which would involve Indias participation in
bloodshed.
I listened with the utmost care and attention to your argu-
ment, and our examination of the situation has been full and
close. I felt bound, however, in the outcome, to make it clear
to you that action such as you suggest would certainly amount
not only to the inhibition of India’s war effort, but to that
embarrassment of Great Britain in the prosecution of the war
which the Congress state that they are anxious to avoid; and
that it would clearly not be possible in the interests of India
herself, more particularly at this most critical juncture in the
war, to acquiesce in the interference with the war effort which
would be involved in freedom of speech so wide as that for
which you had asked.
Gandhiji’s Reply
Dear Lord Linlithgow,
I have your letter of even date. It fairly sets forth the Con-
gress position as I placed it before you. It is a matter of deep
regret to me that the Government have not been able to
VICEROY-GANDHI CORRESPONDENCE
861
appreciate the Congress position, meant just to satisfy the bare
requirements of the people, whether Congressmen or others,
who felt a conscientious objection to helping a w:ar to which
they were never invited and which they regard, so as they
are concerned, as one for saving Imperialism, of which India
is the greatest victiim Their objection is just as conscientious
as mine as a war resister. I cannot claim greater freedom for
my conscience than^or that of those I have named.
As I made it plain in the course of our talks, the Congress
is as much opposed to victory-for Nazism as any Britisher can
be. But their objection cannot be carried to the extent of their
participation in the war. And since you and the Secretary of
State for India have declared that the whole of India is volun-
tarily helping the war effort, it becomes necessary to make clear
that the vast majority of the people ”of India are not interested
in it. They make no distinction between Nazism and the double
autocracy that rules India. Had His Majesty’s Government
recognized the freedom required in the special condition of
India, they would have justified the claim that they were receiv-
ing from India only such effort as they could voluntarily. The
war party and the no-war party would have been placed on an
equal footing so far each worked fully non-violently.
As to the last paragraph of your letter, I wish to ^ remind
you that it was never contemplated to carry non-embarrassment
to the point of self-extinction or, in other words, stopping all
national activities which were designed to make India peace-
minded and show that India’s participation could not benefit
‘anyone, not excluding Great Britain. Indeed I hold that, if
India were left free to make her choice which freedom of
speech implied, India would probably have turned the scales in
favour of Britain and true liberty by the moral prestige which
Britain would have then gained.
I must, therefore, repeat that the Congress does still want
to refrain from embarrassing the British Government in their
war effort- But it is impossible for the Congress to make of the
policy a fetish by den3dng its creed at this critical period in
the history of manidnd. If the Congress has to die, it should do
so in the act of proclaiming its faith. It is unfortunate that we
have not been able to arrive at an agreement on the single issue
of freedom of speech. But I shall hug the hope that it will be
362
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
possible for the Government to work out their policy in the
spirit of the Congress position; ^
I should like to touch upon the other points I raised in our
talks. But for fear of burdening this reply, I refrain. I shall
hope to make a public statement on them as early as I can.
In conclusion, let me thank you publicly for the great
courtesy and patience with which you listened to my very long
statement and argument. And though our ways seem to diverge
for the moment, our personal friendship will, as you have
kindly said at the time of saying farewell, bear the strain of
divergence.
As arranged I am handing our correspondence to the Press
for publication.
Harijan^ 6-10-1940
144
SINDH HINDUS
Shri Shamlal Gidwani writes a letter on the situation in
Sindh from which I quote the following ;
Most of us Sindh Hindus have not been able to follow the
advice you thought fit to tender regarding non-violence. We
find that this advice is in direct conflict with the teachings of
Lord Shri Krishna. We have also been advised by you to mig-'
rate somewhere else if we are not able to protect ourselves.
This advice again we are unable to follow for practical reasons.^
You know several of the reasons, and you have yourself
mentioned some of them in your recent article in Harijan which
we all greatly appreciate. You also know that Hindus in Sindh,
though only 27 per cent of the population, own fifty* per cent
of the land. We are scattered all over the province, and our
population in some of the villages is between two to ten per
cent. We pay nearly the whole of the income-tax revenue in
the province ; we contribute fifty per cent of land revenue and
nearly the whole of the customs revenue. If we follow your
advice, we shall be not only cowards but become landless and
countryless. There is also a danger in our migrating to other
provinces, for it will mean a public confession of the failure of
a community to protect itself merely because an aggressive
community thought fit to tyrannize over us and the protecting
arms of law and order were not made available for us. That
SINDH HINDUS
363
■would again be a confession of the failure of democracy. On
the other hand, what we feel is that, if you had advised the
people of Sindh — particularly the Hindus — to train themselves
in the use of arms, they would -have been able to better protect
themselves and would have been saved all the series of murders
that had been wantonly committed on the Hindus in recent
months.”
At the same time that I received this letter, I saw in the
papers that five Hindus were shot dead openly while they were
pursuing their normal business. As usual the murderers have
not been traced. Is this a plan of terrorism to drive the Hindus
out of Sindh, or is it something else ? Someone in Sindh ought
to be able to answer the question.
Shri Gidwani does not subscribe to non-violence. He thinks
that my advice is contrary to the teachings of Lord Krishna.
He thinks, for (for himself) very good reasons, that the Hindus
cannot act non-'violently. For equally good reasons he thinks
they cannot migrate. But he would like me to advise them to
defend themselves by arms. This is like asking a nature cure
physician to prescribe allopathic drugs. Can he be trusted tO'
prescribe the right drugs ? And what will my ad'vice be worth
when my ovm hands are incapable of -wielding arms ? Shri
Gidwani should go to a physician who knows the business
and will, on due occasion, run to the rescue and always be
ready to give the necessary training. I have said that for those
who do not believe in non-violence armed defence is the only
remedy. But if I am asked to advise how it can be done, I can
only say, “ I do not know.”
But Shri Gidwani is trifling -with the crisis when he lazily
looks up to me to guide Sindh Hindus on impossible terms. If
he sincerely believes in the solution he has proposed, he must
himself take the training at once and lead the terrified Hindus
of Sindh along the path of armed defence. It is -wrong for the
leaders of Sindh to look for outside help. They should cease to
-write. They should seriously think out -a plan of action, violent
or non--violent, and follow it up firmly and bravely.
I venture also to suggest to the responsible Muslims of
Sindh that their reputation is at stake. If they' cannot stop
those senseless murders of innocent people, history will find
them guilty. They -will never persuade anybody that they are-
helpless to deal -wth the mischief. Such acts are impossible
564
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
without the silent sympathy of the society to which the per-
petrators of murders belong.
Simla 28-9-40
Harijan^ 6-10-1940
A BRITISH ENDORSEMENT
Mr. Stephen J, Thorne, Secretary to the Society of Friends,
sends me the following letter ;
‘‘ We, a group of Friends, want to send you our deep grati-
tude for your impressive appeal to every Briton to adopt the
way of non-violence and bring about a cessation of hostilities.
We^drew together immediately on receiving the short version
of your statement, and were later able to obtain a fuller text.
You have received through the Viceroy the response of the
British Government to your proffer of help, a response that,
from your knowledge of the situation, you will easily imder-
stand. To most Britons the call to throw down their arms in
a moment of supreme national pejdl and in face of imminent
aggression is indistinguishable from cowardice and treason; it
is an invitation to save their lives by the surrender of principles
of liberty and justice that are dearer than life Itself. But to
those of us who in the peace movement share your faith in
non-violence, you present ^a tremendous challenge. Few of us
are fully prepared to stand up to it; and we are conscious
of our own failure to convince our fellow countrymen of the
value and practicability of this 'more ' excellent Way'. The
technique of non-violent resistance as you have practised it is
little understood in th'e West ; especially in its positive and re-
conciling sense ; and for that reason, apart from any other,
your appeal has not yet met with any wide response.
Though the British Government’s reply must have been dis-
appointing, we are anxious to make full use of your offered
' help. Your appeal gave expression to a spirit that is moving,
we are certain, 'in the hearts of men all over the world. Wc
believe that it would be a step forward if you were willing to
address a further message to certain of the spiritual leaders
of the world, urging them to act together in taking hold of the
situation before the winter brings fresh disaster.
A BRITISH ENiJdRSEMENT
S65-
1
We hope you will maintain the closest contact with us^
sending direct the full text of anything you may say in the-
days ahead.
Your friends sincerely,
Horace G. Alexander
Anna Bidder
Robert Davis
Carl Heath
James H, Hudson
J. Cuthbert Wigham
Percy W. Bartlett
W. Maude Brayshaw
A. Ruth Fry
Elizabeth Pox Howard
Francis E. Pollard
Alexander C. Wilson
P.S. The Council of Christian Pacifist Groups associates
itself with this letter, and looks forward to an early opportunity
of discussing the deep issues involved.”
•I am thankful to the signatories for their support of my
appeal. I can assure them that immediately I see the psycholo-
gical moment I shall act up to the signatories’ expectation that
I should address the spiritual leaders of the world. It is quite
evident that the very thoroughness of the Nazi method makes
them think that nothing but counter-violence can check the
terror. I have suggested that counter- violence can only result in
further brutalization of human nature. Drastic diseases require
drastic remedies. In this instance nothing but non-violence can
cure Nazi violence.
Sevagram, 16-10-40
Harijan, 20-10-1940
146
PEACE ORGANIZATION
If the Congress were an organization with, a military bias,
there is no doubt that today it would be a fuU-fledged military
unit, every member becoming trained to be an efficient soldier.
Fortanately for India and humanity, the Congress is not such
an organization. No other purely national organization is or
can be in the India of today. Fortunately again for India and
humanity, the Congress has pledged itself since 1920 to ^vin
India’s freedom through non-violent means. But up to now it
has been largely a debating society, offering civil disobedience
at intervals and all the time only playing vnih its vital pro-
gramme of construction. At one time every Congressman was
expected to create something for the nation. He or she was to
spin for the nation. Congressmen would not respond, and the
clause about spinning was dropped. There were other items too
which every Congressman was to work. But he has not done
so to the extent expected. The moment has now come for him
to make a definite choice. The only programme before him is
to become a servant or soldier of peace. A soldier of peace,
unlike the one of the sword, has to give all his spare time to the
promotion of peace alike in war time as in peace time. His
work in peace time is both a measure of prevention of, as also
that of preparation for, war time.
If then I was a Congressman with a vote, I would vote, as
an emergency measure, for requiring every Congressman now
on the Congress register or to come hereafter to possess the
minimum qualifications for working the constructive programme.
It would be wrong to remind me that the Congress should
retain its democratic character. It will not lose it because, of
its own motion, it becomes an efficient working body which any-
body imdertaking to obey its discipline and conditions of mem-
bership may join. The Congress will cease to be popular, if
it cannot deserve popularity in times of stress. If it cannot pro-
vide work for the workless and hungry, if it cannot protect
the people from depredations or teach them hov/ to face them,
CGG
PEACE ORGAOTZATION
867
if it cannot help them in the face of danger, it will lose its
prestige and popularity. No person or corporation can live long
on his or its capital The latter has to circulate and multiply
itself.
The Congress has become popular because it has been fore-
most in fighting imperialism. Today the old way is of no avail.
Nobody thinks of mass revolt at the present moment. The best,
quickest, and most efficient way is to build up from the bottom.
The psychological moment has come. “ Back to the villages !”
has become a necessity from every point of view. Now is the
time to decentrahze production and distribution. Every village
has to become a self-sufficient republic. This does not require
brave resolutions. It requires brave, corporate, intelligent work.
As far as I know at the present moment this is common ground
between the rulers and the people.
Let every Congressman answer for himself whether he will
be a soldier or servant of peace or whether he will become a
nonentity xmwilling to take his place in building up Swaraj.
On train Bardoli-Wardha, 9-1-42
Harijan, 18-1-1942 ''
147
(
REAL WAR EFFORT
The greatest need of the immediate present is to feed the
hungry and clothe the naked. There is already scarcity in the
land both of food and clothing. As the war progresses, both the
scarcities must increase. There are no imports from outside,
either of food-stuff or of cloth. The well-to-do may not feel the
pinch as yet or at all, but the poor are feeling it now. The
well-to-do live on the poor. There is ’no other way. What is
then their duty? He who saves gains as much, that is to say
he produces as much. Hence those who feel for the poor, those
who would be one with them must curtail their wants. There
are many ways. I shall only mention some here. There is
much, too much food eaten and wasted by the well-to-do.
Use one grain at a time. Chapati, rice, and pulses, milh^
ghee, pud, and oil are used in orchnary house-holds besides vege-
tables and fruit. I regard this as an unhealthy combination.
Those who get animal protein in the shape of milk, cheese, eggs
or meat need not use pulses at all. The poor people get onl}*'
vegetable protein. If the well-to-do give up pulses and oils, they
set free those two essentials for the poor who get neither animal
protein nor animal fat. Then the grain eaten should not be
sloppy. Half the quantity suffices when it is eaten dry and not
dipped in any gravy. It is well to eat it with raw salads such as
onion, carrot, radish, salad leaves, tomatoes. An ounce or two
of salads serves the purpose of eight ounces of cooked vegetables. '
Chapatis or bread should not be eaten with millw. To begin with,,
one meal may be raw vegetables and chapati or bread, and the
other cooked vegetables with milk or curds. -
Sweet dishes should be eliminated altogether. Instead giid
or sugar in small quantities may be taken \vith milk or bread or
by itself.
Fresh fruit is good to eat, but only a little^is necessary to
give tone to the system. It is an expensive article, and an over-
indulgence by the well-to-do has deprived the poor and the ail-
ing of an article which they need much more than the well-to-do*
3GS
REAL WAR EFFORT
S69
Any medical man who has studied the science of dietetics
will certify that what I have suggested can do no harm to the
body, on the contrary it must conduce to better health.
This is only one way of saving food-stuff. It is obvious. But
by itself it cannot produce much visible effect.
Grain-dealers have to shed their greed and the habit of
making as much profit as possible. They must be satisfied with
as little as possible. They run the risk of being looted, if they
do not gain the credit of being keepers of gram for the sake of
the poor. They should be in touch with the people in their
neighbourhood. Congressmen have to visit grain-dealers within
their beat and give them the message of the time.
By far the most important part of the work consists in edu-
cating the villagers to keep what they have and to induce culti-
vation of fresh crops wherever water is available. This requires
widespread and intelligent propaganda. It is not generally
known that bananas, potatoes, beetroot, yam and suran and in
a measure pumpkin are a food crop easily gjrown. They can
take the place of bread in time of need.
There is too scarcity of money. There may be grain avail-
able but no money to buy it with. There is no money because
there is no employment. This has to be found. Spinning is
the readiest and the handiest. But local needs may supply other
sources of labour. Every available source has to be lapped so
that there is no want of employment. Only the lazy ones need
and must starve. Patient handling will induce even this class
to shed their laziness.
The problem of clothing is much easier than feeding, if it is
handled well in time. The mills may not be relied on in these
times. There is ample cotton to be had in India. It is a prob-
lem for cotton cultivators how to dispose of their stock. The
outside market is closed to them. Oiu: mills cannot absorb
the whole of the crop. It can be utilized, if the nation takes to
spinning not for wages but for the sake of clothing the naked,
"v Of course those who need emplojmient will spin for profit. This
nmnber must be limited. They need organizing. Much money
( will be needed for the purpose. But national spinning does not
need so much organizing. Profit motive being eliminated and
willingness being assiuned, organization is reduced to simplest
terms. -
N. V. 2t
S70
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
This is no time for multiplying wheels. They take time to
manufacture. Raw material is daily becoming dearer. Wheels
cannot be manufactured everywhere. Places where they are
can be counted by the fingers of one hand.
Therefore I suggest the plying of the dharvusli takli and even
the simple takli. The former should be manufactured locally.
Indeed it is difficult to manufacture the simple takli at once in
lakhs. The dhanush takli is the only thing which can be the
easiest manufactured. Slivers cannot be supplied to spinners.
Each one should get some cotton for himself or herself, and card
it as well as may be 'with the hand or with a home-made small
bow such as the children in the Bihar basic schools have. All
this can be done because no one is expected to manufacture a
large quantity of yam. If every one of our available millions
span for one hour daily, there would be enough yam to keep
every handloom going. Ihe reader should know that there are
lakhs of hand-loom weavers in the land. There is danger of
their starving for want of yam.
Here is a great task for every Congressman to undertake.
He has to become a good spinner and carder and know how to
manufacture the dhanush takli. Let every Congressman begin
^vith himself and his family and neighbours, and he will find
that the life-giving contagion spreads like wild fire which
envelops you before you hardly know what you are \vitnessing.
Any organization that tackles these two problems success-
fully 'will command the love and confidence of the people. I
hope that aU 'will join in this real war effort. It is none the less
effective because it is peaceful and constructive.
Will the Princes let their people do this work %vithout let or
hindrance ? Will Quaid-e-Azam Jinnah allow the members of the
Muslim League to co-operate 'with the Congress workers in
this truly national but non-politicak work which is also huma-
nitarian ? There are 23,000 Muslim spinners, carders and
weavers earning their daily bread through the A, I. S. A.
On the way to Kashi, 19-1-42
Harijan, 25-1-1942
148
A DEPLORABLE INCIDENT
As Sardar VaUabhbhai was leaving Sevagram the other day
he told me of a dacoity in a home in Kheda District. Armed
dacoits entered the house, belaboured the inmates, and. escaped
with the loot. The story was heart-rending. What should I do
under similar circumstances, I thought to myself. What should
Congressmen do in the circumstances was the next thought ; and
since then the train of thought arising from the dacoity has
taken possession of me. The Congress has been working con-
tinuously since 1920 under the policy of non-violence. The
province of Gujarat has also had the advantage of a leader of
the Sardar’s calibre. And -yet daring dacoities can take place.
How far then can Congress influence be said to have penetrated ? n
P eople imagine that, if the British Government were to cease
to function today, it would be the non-violent Congressmen
who would automatically take over. But it is not so. I have been
working to this end for the last twenty years, but my dream
has not materialized. For the Congress has not had a living
faith in the very means which it adopted in 1920. Therefore
the non-violence of the Congress has really been non-violence
of the weak. But governments can only be nm by the strong.
And a non-violent government can only be rim by those who
believe that non-violence is the mightiest force on earth. If we
had had this strength, there would be no Hindu-Muslim riots,
there would be no robbers or dacoits. Some might say that for
such strength you need either a Jesus or a Buddha, But this
is not so. Neither Jesus nor Buddha tried non-violence in the
political, sphere, or it would be truer to say that the present
day type of politics did not exist in their day. The Congress
experiment is, therefore, a new one. The tragedy is that
Congressmen have not tried it with full faith, full understanding
and sincerity. If they had had these three essential qualities,
the Congress would today have been far taller than it is. But
I may not cry over spilt milk. I refer to the past only in order
to guide us in the present. Even if we wake up now, the game
is ours ; if we do not, we shall surely lose. Power invariably
371
I
372
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
elects to go into the hands of the strong. That strength may be
physical or of the heart, or, if we do not fight shy of the word,
of the spirit. Strength of the heart coimotes soul force. If today
we decide that we should try to get power by force of arms,
we shall have to undo all &e work of twenty years among
the masses. We shall have to spend a considerable time in giv-
ing people a contrary training. We cannot afford to give the
required time at this critical juncture. It is certain that today
whoever has any strength of any kind will use it for seizing
power. It is my firm conviction that, if Congressmen are to
get power, it should only be through non-'^olence or soul force.
We have neither time nor material to do new work even in
this line. When we have so far employed non-violence as a
weapon of the weak, how can we all of a sudden expect to con-
vert it into a weapon of the strong ? But in spite of this' I
feel that at the present moment this experiment alone is feasi-
ble and proper for us. There is no risk involved in it. Even
failure in it takes the form of success because, even if the people
are not able to go the whole length in the experiment, they can-
not possibly be led into a ditch. By following the way of physi-
cal force they may not only be proved cowards, but in attempt-
ing to follow an untrodden path thousands may also be destroyed.
It is then the duty of Congressmen to seek out dacoits and
robbers. They should try to understand and convert them. Such
workers cannot be had for the asking; but Congressmen should
know that this work is just as important as it is fraught with
risk, and a certain number of them have to devote themselves
to it. '
The second thing requisite is that we should prepare such
workers as would, under difficult circumstances, stand up to
dacoits and, whilst trying to check or convert them from their
evil ways, be prepared to suffer hiirt or even death. Perhaps
few workers will be forthcoming for this task too, but peace bri-
gades throughout the country are a definite necessity. Or else
in times of chaos Congressmen will lose all the reputation they
have so far gain^
Thirdly, the rich should ponder well as to what is their
duty today. They who employ mercenaries to guard their
wealth may find those very guardians turning on them. The
moneyed classes have got to learn how to fight either with arms
“SUPPOSE GERMANY WINS”
373
or with the weapon of non-viol«ice. For those who wish to
follow the latter way the best and most effective maniram is :
(Enjoy thy wealth by renouncing it). Ex-
panded it means ; “ E^n your crores by all means. But imder-
stand that your wealth is not yours ; it belongs to the people.
Take what you require for your legitimate needs, and use the
remainder for society.” This truth has hitherto not been acted
upon ; but, if the moneyed classes do not even act on it in these
times of stress, they will remain the slaves of their riches and
passions and consequently of those who overpower them.
But I have visions that the end of this war will mean also
the end of the rule of capital. I see coming the day of the
rule of the poor, whether that rule be through force of arms or
of non-violence. Let it be remembered that physical force is
transitory even as the body is transitory. But the pow.er of the
spirit is permanent, even as the qiirit is everlasting.
Sevagram, 25-1-42
Harijan, 1-2-1942
149
“SUPPOSE GERMANY WINS”
“Suppose Germany wins with India not having entered
the war, would Hitler leave India alone ? Certainly not, my
dear Mr. Gandhi, he will have a greater say in India than
what Britain has now. The difference is this. You can fight
the Englishman, but you cannot fight the German once he
puts his foot on India’s soil. Civil Disobedience is the terror
of the Englishman, it is the daily bread of the Nazi.”
This is a question extracted from a very long and earnest
letter from an English correspondent from South Africa. The
first fallacy is that India is assmned not to have entered the
war when to all intents and purposes she is in the war in spite
of the powerful protest of the Congress. She is so much in the
war that Great Britain is effectively using all the available
fighting material which her generals have brought into being
and trained, and is draining all the money she can. Politically-
minded Indians have never been trained except for doing the
374
NON-VIOLENCE IN -PEACE AND WAR
rulers’ clerical work. They are certainly holding themselves
aloof until certain obviously necessary conditions are fulfilled.
I do not see how they can be blamed for demanding the very
liberty in defence of which the AUied Powers are said to be
fighting. What Indians can do even i£ their demand is accepted
is to give their moral weight to the struggle. This the rulers
evidently do not care- for. It cannot, in their opinion, tiun the
scales in their favour. Moral values do not coimt when each
party swears by its material and physical resources. The Con-
gress, with all the wiU in the world to defeat Nazism, cannot
thrust its help on Great Britain which evidently it does not
want or about which it is at least indifferent. If, therefore. Great
Britain suffers defeat, it will not be for want of Congress co-
operation but for causes over which the Congress can have no
control
If the Nazis come to India, the Congress will give them the
same fight that it has given Great Britain. I do not imderrate
the power of satyagraha as the questioner does. But that is
pure speculation. Imperialism 'has kept its grip on India for
more than 150 years. If it is overthrown by a' worse type of
rule, the Congress can have the negative satisfaction of kno-wing
that no other ‘ ism ’ can possibly last beyond a few years even
if it establishes a foothold in India. That is as I read tlie Con-
gress mind. Personally I think the end of this giant war will
be what happened in the fabled Mahabharata War. The Maha-
bharata has been aptly described by a Travancorin as the Perma-
nent History of Man. What is described in that great epic is
happening today before our very eyes. The warring nations are
destroying themselves with such fury and ferocity that the end
will be mutual exhaustion. The victor will share the fate that
awaited the surviving Pandavas. The mighty warrior Arjuna
was looted in broad daylight by a petty robber. And out of this
holocaust must arise a new order for which the exploited mil-
lions of toilers have so long thirsted. The prayers of peace-
lovers cannot go in vain. Satyagraha is itself an unmistakable
mute prayer of an agonized soul.
Sevagram, 10-2-42
Harijan, 15-2-1942
150
PLEA FOR CALMNESS
The recent British reverses ought not to create panic in the
land. In all the wars that Britain has fought or in which she has
been engaged there have been reverses some of which may be
considered disastrous. But the British have a knack of surviv-
ing them and turning them into stepping-stones to success.
Hence the saying peculiar to them that they blimder through
to success. Failures do not dismay or demoralize them. They
take them with calmness and in a sportsmanlike spirit. Wars
are for them a national game like footbaU. The defeated team
heartily congratulates the successful one almost as if it was a
joint victory, and drowns the sorrow of defeat in an exchange
of glasses of whisky. If we have learnt nothing worth from
the contact with the British, let us at least learn their calmness
in the face of misfortunes.
And is there the slightest cause for alarm ? Certainly not
for. those who believe in non-violence. For fear and distrust of
self are no part of their composition, nor are they part of a
panoplied soldier. The attribute of non-violence is perhaps only
a copy book maxim. We do not see it in actual practice in any
measure. But this war is abundant proof that neither party
"'though steeped in violence betrays any fear or distrust. I am
filled with amazement and admiration at the reckless bravery
displayed by combatants on .either side. This war is' demon-
stration of the unthinkable nerve that human beings are capa-
ble of possessing. Looked at from either standpoint, therefore,
we should be ashamed of fear, distrust and nervelessness in the
face of danger. It is, .therefore, the sacred duty of every worker
to steel himself against cowardly panic and prevent its spread
as far as he can. “ Cowards die many times before their death.”
Let this not be proved of us.
The true danger exists only for cities. It may be very near
due to the fall of Singapore and probable loss of Burma. One
of the best precautions consists in those people who are not
wanted in the cities or those who want to shim danger, migrat-
375 ,
376
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
ing to the villages in an orderly manner. There should be no
panicky rush. Those who must remain in the cities whether
for business or otherwise should carry out instructions that may
be issued by the authorities from time to time. Those who will
not, for any reason whatsoever, should clear out in good time.
Jf this simple precaution is taken, we may face the future with-
out perturbation. More I cannot say, for we are a house divided
against itself and there is no living bond between the rulers and
the ruled. It is tragic but it is true. The tragedy is deepened
by the knowledge that all parties feel so helpless.
On the train to Calcutta, 17-2-42
Harijan, 22-2-1942
151
CRIMINAL ASSAULTS
The whole world is on trial today. No one can escape
from the war. Whilst the Ramayana and the Mahabharata are
products of poets’ imagination, their authors were not mere
rhymsters. The 3 r were seers. What they depicted is happening
before our very eyes today. Havanas are warring with each
other. They are showing matchless strength. They throw their
deadly weapons from the air. No deed of braver^’’ in the battle-
field is beyond their capacity or imagination.
Man would not fight in this manner, certainly not the gods.
Only brutes can. Soldiers drunk with the pride of physical
strength loot shops and are not even ashamed to take liberties
with women. The administration is powerless in war time to
prevent such happenings. The army fulfils their primary need,
and they wink the e 3 ’’e at their misdeeds. Where a whole nation
is militarized the way of military life becomes part and parcel
of its civilization. Therefore a soldier’s taking such liberties is
not a matter for condemnation. But it would take generations
for India to become so.
Hence arise questions like the following which a sister sends
me :
(1) If a soldier commits an assault on a woman, can she
be said to have lost her virtue ?
CRIMINAL ASSAULIS
877
(2) Is such a woman to be condemned and ostracized by
society ?
(3) What should women and the public do under such cir-
cumstances ? ”
Whilst the woman has in point of fact lost her virtue, the
loss cannot in any way render her liable to be condemned or
treated as an outcast. She is entitled to our sympathy for she
has been cruelly injured, and we diould tend her wounds as we
would those of any injured person,
A woman is worthy of condemnation only when she is a
witling party to her dishonour. In no case are adultery and
criminal assault synon3Tnous terms. , If we were to view the
matter in this light, we would not hide such instances as has
thus far been our wont. Public opinion against such conduct
on the part of men towards women would then be created and
freely exercised.
If the Press carried on a sustained agitation, soldiers White
or Brown would probably cease to behave in this manner. Their
officers would be compelled to prevent such misbehaviour.
My advice to women is that they should leave the cities and
migrate to the villages where a wide field of service awaits them.
There is comparatively little risk of their being assaulted in
•villages. They must, however, live simple lives and make them-
selves one with the poor. If they will display their wealth by
dressing in silks and satins and wearing jewellery, they will, in
running away from one danger, expose themselves to a double.
Naturally the ad'vice cannot refer to those, whom duty compels
to live in cities.
The main thing, however, is for women to know how to be
fearless. It is my firm con'viction that a fearless. woman who
knows that her purity is her best shield can never be dis-'
honoured. However beastly the man, he -will bow in shame
before the fiame of her dazzling purity. There are examples
even in modem times of women who have thus defended them-
selves. I can, as I write, recall two such instances. I therefore
recommend women who read this article to try to cultivate this
courage. They wall become wholly fearless, if they can and
cease to tremble as they do today at the mere thought of
assaults. It is not, however, necessary for a woman to go through
a bitter. experience for the sake of passing a test of courage.
378
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
These experiences mercifully do not come in the way of lakhs -
or even thousands. Every soldier is not a beast. It is a minority
that loses aU sense of decency. Only twenty per cent of snakes
are poisonous, and out of these a few only bite. They do not
attack unless trodden on. But this knowledge does not -help
those who are full of fear and tremble at the sight of a snake.
Parents and husbands should, therefore, instruct women in the
art of becoming fearless. It can best be learnt from a living
faith in God. Though He is invisible, He is one’s unfailing pro-
tector. He who has this faith is the most fearless of alL
But such faith or courage cannot be acquired in a day^
Meantime we must try to explore other means. When a woman
is assaulted she may not stop to think in terms of himsa or
aliimsa. Her primary duty is self-protection. She is at liberty
to employ every method or means that come to her mind in order
to defend her honour, God has given her nails and teeth. She
must use them \vith all her strength and, if need be, die in the
effort. The man or woman who has shed all fear of death vnil
be able not only to protect himself or herself but others also
through laying down his life. In truth we fear death most, and
hence we ultimately submit to superior physical force. Some
will bend the knee to the invader, some will resort to bribery,
some will crawl on their bellies or submit to other forms of
humiliation, and some women vnTL even give their bodies rather
than die. I have not written this in a carping spirit. I am only
illustrating human nature. Whether we crawl on our bellies
or whether a woman yields to the lust of man is symbolic of
that same love of life which makes us stoop to an3’^thing. There-
fore only he who loses his life shall save it : ^ -
Every reader should commit this matchless sliloka to memor3\
But mere lip loyalty to it will be of no avail. It must penetrate
deep dovm to the innermost recesses of his heart. To enjoy life
one should give up the lure of life. That should be part of our
nature.
So much for what a woman should do. But what about a
man who is witness to such crimes ? The answer is implied in
the foregoing. He must not be a passive onlooker. He must pro-
tect the woman. He must not run for police help ; he must not
rest satisfied by pulling the alarm chain in the train. If he is
able to practise non-violence, he will die in doing so and thus
CRIMINAL ASSAULTS
379
save the woman in jeopardy. If he does not believe in non-
violence or cannot, practise it, he must try to save her by using
all the force he may have. In either way there must be readi-
ness on his part to lay down Tiis life.
If old, decrepit and toothless, as I am, I were to plead non-
violence and be a helpless witness of assault on the honour of a
sister, my so-called Mahatmaship would be ridiculed, dishonoured
and lost. If I or those like me were to intervene and lay down
our lives whether violently or non-violently, we would surely
save the prey and at any rate we would not remain living wit-
nesses to her dishonour.
So much about the witnesses. But if th^ courageous spirit
pervades the entire atmosphere of our country and it is known
that no Indian will stand women being assaulted, I venture to
say that no soldier will dare to touch them. That such a spirit
does not exist is a matter of shame for us. But it will be some-
thing, if persons ready to wipe out this blot are forthcoming.
Those who have influence with the Government will try to
get the authorities to take the necessary action. But self-help
is best help. In the present circumstances we may rely only on
our own strength and God’s help.
On the train to Wardha, 19-2-42
Harijan, 1-3-1942
152
ON ITS TRIAL
‘T am a pacifist still in one sense ; that is to say, I realize
that Christians should be able to meet material force with
spiritual power. It is horrifying to reflect that after nineteen
hundred years, we are still unable to do it except in individual
cases and on a small scale. But to me it seems merely 'wishful
thinking ^ to act as though we had a power which in fact we
have not and for which we have neither trained nor disciplined
ourselves in the past. Such power does not come to those
who have not disciplined themselves, at the last moment, in
the hour of need. It has not come to us. I would rather, there-
fore, do what I can in defence of principles which I believe
to be both right in themselves and of enormous importance
to the future of the human race, than stand aside and do no-
thing. It is doing nothing that is the worst expedient of all.
When, therefore, my pacifist friends ask me whether I can
imagine Jesus Christ dropping a bomb or firing a gun I am
entitled to reply : ' No, I cannot ; but neither can I imagine
him standing aside and doing nothing at all.'
I am compelled to echo the words of a very dear relative
of mine who, loathing war as much as any pacifist that ever
breathed, said to me at the beginning of the last war (in which
he lost his life) : 'If you can stop war with spiritual power,
do it. If you can’t, let me do what I can ; and if you are right
in thinking that war is so damnable that anyone who takes
part in it is damned, then I would rather be damned than let
these things go on without doing all I can to stop them, even
at the cost of my own life.’
Is this not very close to the meaning of our Lord when he
said : ‘He that loseth his life shall save it’? ”
The foregoing is the concluding portion 'of a touchingly sor-
rowful article contributed to The Survey Graphic of December
1941 by the celebrated Dr. Maude Royden of the Guildhouse,
London. She is one of the foremost pacifists of the West, Like
many she has felt compelled to revise her position and is now
most reluctantly but fully ranged on the side of the defenders of
the British Isles.
The article demands a considered repl}^ I have been in con-
stant touch wdth the Western pacifists. In my opinion
3S0
ON ITS TRIAL
881
Dr. Royden has surrendered her position in the portion I have
qpoted. If individuals have lived up to the Christian teaching
(i,e. on non-violence) and that on a small scale, one would think
practice should make such a life possible for many people and on
a large scale. It is undoubtedly wrong and foolish “ to act as
though one had the power which in fact one has not,” “ But,”
says the worthy writer, “ such power does not come to those who-
have not disciplined themselves, at the last moment, in the hour
of need,”
I suggest that with the knowledge of the defect no time
should be lost in seeking to remove it. That by itself is doing
not only something but the right thing. To deny one’s faith by
contrary practice is surely the worst thing one can do.
And I am not sure that “ doing nothing is the worst expe-
dient of all.” In septic treatment, for instance, doing nothing is
not only expedient, it is obligatory.
There is no cause whatsoever for despondency, much less for
denial of one’s faith at the crucial moment, ’^y should not
British pacifists stand aside and remodel their life in its entirety ?
They might be unable to bring' about peace outright, but they
would lay a solid foundation for it and give the surest test of
their faith. When, in the face of an upheaval such as we are
witnessing, there are only a few individuals of immovable faith,
they have to live up to their faith even though they may produce
no visible effect on the coiurse of events. They should believe
that their action will produce tangible results in due course.
Their staunchness is bound to attract sceptics. I would also
suggest that individuals like Dr. Maude Royden are not mere
camp followers. They are leaders. Therefore, they have to live
their lives in strict accord with the Sermon on the Mount, and
they will find immediately that there is much to give up and
much to remodel. The greatest thing that they have to deny
themselves is the fruit of imperialism. The present complicated
life of the Londoner and his high living is possible only because
of the hoards brought from Asia, Africa and other parts of the
world. In spite of the fierce criticism which has been levelled
against my letter ‘ To Every Briton ’, I adhere to every word of
it, and I am convinced that posterity will adopt the remedy sug-
gested therein against violence however organized." and fierce.
And now that the enemy is at the gates of India I am advising
582
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
my coimt^men the same course of action I advised the British
people. My advice may or may not be Accepted by my country-
men. I would remain unmoved. Their non-acceptance will be
no test of failure of non-violence. I would subscribe to the
charge of my imperfection. But a satyagrdhi does not wait for
perfection before he invites others to experiment with him, pro-
vided always that his faith is immovable like a mountain. The
advice that Dr. Hoyden’s relative gave her and which she quotes
approvingly is altogether wrong. If the war is damnable, how
can he stop the things that go on by taking part in it, even
though it may be on the defensive side and at the cost of his own
life ? For the defence has to resort to all the damnable things
that the enemy does, and that with greater vigour if it has to
succeed. Such a giving of life is not only not saving it but a
mere waste.
I have attended the Doctor’s services in her Church where
a living belief in the efficacy of prayer is much in vogue. When
the impenetrable gloom surrounded her, why did she not find
strength and consolation and real action in heart-prayer ? It is
never too late to mend. She and her fellow-pacifists, many of
whom I have the privilege of. Rowing, should take heart and,
like Peter, repent of the momentary loss of faith and return to
the old faith in non-\dolence with renewed vigour. Their re-
turn will mean no material loss to the war effort but will mean
a great deal to the anti-war effort which is bound to succeed
sooner rather than later, if man is to live as man and not become
a two-footed brute.
Sevagram, 8-3-42
Harijan, 15-3-1942
153
DESIRABILITY OF EXODUS
A correspondent asks for my detailed views on the exodus
that I have advised from the cities of all who are not wanted
there and all who are xmfit or unwilling to stay there. No one
is obliged to stay in against his will. In the event of bombard-
ment, it is clear that non-combatants can only be a burden in
every way. Successful defence against a powerful enemy re-
quires exclusive concentration on holding the enemy at bay.
The defendants’ attention must not be divided. This is from the
military point of view.
But we have war resisters too, either humanitarian or
pbUtical. They may not stay vmless their object is merely to
cause embarrassment for the sake of it. I hope there are none
such. They should, therefore, be out of the cities. Then there
are those who do not know what to do in the event of bombard-
ment. They should all evacuate. As the reader will see, my
opinion has little to do with my w:ar resistance. For in this case
•and up to a point military necessity and duty of war resisters
demand the same action.
If I could convert any city or aU cities wholly, including the
combatants of yesterday, I should welcome the., invading host
and try to convert, even them or challenge them to do their
worst, without offering retaliation. But no such good luck
awaits me. If the cities were converted, aU India including the
rulers would be converted and there would be peace in India
• and peace in the world. But that must remain a daydream yet
awhile. Only I won’t be moved from my position by being t»ld
that the Jap or the Nazi is not the same man as the Englishman.
I draw no such fundamental distinction between man and man.
But I must not detain the reader on the speculative side of the
matter-of-fact question that faces us.
Assuming then that aU who should or a part of them' have
evacuated the cities and have gone to the villages or are about to
go, what should they do ? They must go with the viUage mind
- to live the village life as much as possible. They may not re-
383
384
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
produce city conditions and build temporary palaces. They
should go to the villages in a spirit of service, study their econo-
mic and other conditions, and ameliorate them not by giving
alms but by giving the villagers work of a permanent nature. In
other words, they should work the constructive programme
among the villagers. Thus they will identify themselves with
the villagers and become a kind of co-operative society wth an
ordered programme of economic, social, hygienic and political re-
construction.
The greatest problem ^the new-comers will have to tackle
will be to deal with loot and dacoities. It will taji their resources
to the utmost. The non-violent way is there. If that is not clear
to them, with the co-operation of the villagers they should
organize themselves for armed defence against robbers and
dacoits. We have too long looked to the Government to do this
elementary work for us, not excluding even the ^ reclamation of
castes called criminal tribes. The Government cannot do much,
if anything at all, at this critical time. The work has perforce
to be done by the evacuees violently, non-violently^ or both ways.
Sevagram, 10-3-42
Harijan, 15-3-1942
154
EVACUATION
Q. You have advised evacuation from the cities of those
who are not wanted for service or other reasons. But what are
those poor people to do who have no homes to go to and who
would be unwelcome wherever they go ?
A. This is a real difficulty. They must be provided for by
the people of the provinces to which they belong. If we are one
nation, we should have no difficulty in providing for every con-
tingency that may arise. If we are to establish a new order of
society, we can act from now. I can only speak from the non-
violent angle and no other. If the national mind is working in
that direction, consciously or unconsciously individuals and
institutions will, without fuss, be absorbing aU such persons as
you mention. I know that the process is going on, but not on a
scale large enough to be impressive. No able-bodied person
should be put on charity ; he should be given work enough to
feed him properly. This shifting of the population, if it is wisely
done, must result in a silent reorganization of villages.
Sevagram, 26-4-42
Harijan, 3-5-1942
^ Q. You advise evacuation of cities likely to be bombed and
migration into the vilfages. Do you imagine the villages to be
safe ? As a matter of fact the villagers are more panic-stricken
than the city-dwellers. There is inadequate police protection,
and villagers live in hourly terror of dacoits and -robbers. Is it
not a matter of jumping from the frying pan into the fire ?
A. I have not suggested migration to the villages for the
soft life they will provide. Fright was no ingredient of my plan.
It was and still is good even from a military point of view as has
now been made abundantly clear. All the danger you present
is undoubtedly bovmd up with the migration to the villages. But
that to my mind is an additional reason for it. Who will put
heart into the villagers and dispel panic, if it is not the right
type of experienced city people ? They will cover not only ,the
385
N.V.— 25
38G
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
aged and the infirm who may migrate to the villages, but they
will also help and serve the villagers in the many ways I have
pointed out in these columns. Courage is indispensable in these
times for every true act.
Sevagram, 4-5-42
HarijaUj 10-5-1942
155
VILLAGE SWARAJ
Q. In view of the situation that may arise at any moment
in India, would you give an outline or skeleton of a Village
Swaraj Committee, which could function in aU village matters
In the absence of, and without relying upon an over-head Gov-
ernment or other organization ? In particular, how would you
ensure that the Committee should be fully representative and
that it would act impartially, efficiently and %vithout favour or
fear ? What should be the scope of authority and the machinery
to enforce its commands ? And what should be the manner in
which a committee or an indi\ddual member of it could be
removed for corruption, inefficiency or other unfitness ?
A. My idea of \dllage Swaraj is that it is a complete re-
public, independent of its neighbours f<5r its own vital wants,
and yet interdependent for many others in which dependence
is a necessity. Thus every village’s first concern \vill be to
grow its own food crops and cotton for its cloth. It should have
a reserve for its cattle, recreation and playground for adults and
children. Then if there is more land available, it will grow
wsc/wl money crops, thus excluding ganja, tobacco, opium and
the like. The village will maintain a village theatre, school and
public hall. It will have its own waterworks ensuring clean
water supply. This can be done through controlled wells or
tanks. Education will be' compulsory up to the final basic course.
As far as possible everj’’ acti\dty will be conducted on the co-
operative basis. There will be no caste such as we have today
with their graded untouchability. Non-violence with its tech-
nique of satyagraha and non-co-operation will be the sanction
VILLAGE SWARAJ
387
of the village community. There will be a compulsory service
of village guards who will be selected by rotation from the
register maintained by the village. The Government of the
village will be .conducted by the Panchayat of five persons
annually elected by the adult villagers, male and female, pos-
sessing minimum prescribed qualifications. These will have all
the authority and jurisdiction required. Since there will be no
system of punishments in the accepted sense, this Panchayat
will be the legislature, judiciary and executive combined to
operate for its year of office. Any village can become such a
republic today without much interference, even from the pre-
sent Government whose sole effective connection with the vil-
lages is the exaction of the village revenue. I have not
examined here the question of relations with the neighbouring
villages and the centre if any. My purpose is to present an out-
line of village government. Here there is perfect democracy
based upon individual freedom. The individual is the architect
of his own government. The law of non-violence rules him and
his government. He and his village are' able to defy the might
of the world. For the law governing every villager is that he
will suffer death in the defence of his arid his village’s honour.
The reader may well ask me, as I am asking myself while
penning these lines, as to why I have not been able to model
Sevagram after the picture here drawn. My answer is, I am
making the attempt. I can see dim traces of success though
I can show nothing visible. But there is nothing inherently
impossible in the picture drawn here. To model such a village
may be the work of a life time. Any lover of true democracy
and village life can take up a village, treat it as his world and
sole work, and he will find good results. He begins by being the
village scavenger, spinner, watchman, medicine man and school-
master all at once. If nobody comes near him, he will be satisfied
with scavenging and spinning. ,
Sevagram, 18-7-42
Harijan, 26-7-1942 ’ f
156
‘ SCORCHED EARTH ’
The Russian technique of scorched earth has staggered
humanity, but hiunanity has been powerless to do anything
except applaud the amazing sacrifice and bravery that counted
no cost too great to circumvent the enemy. I have shared the
amazement with the admirers but not their admiration.
We like to imitate what we admire. Now that the prospect
faces us, are we able to contemplate with equanimity, or feel
the glow of bravery and sacrifice at, the prospect of India’s earth
being scorched and everything destroyed in order that the
enemy’s march may be hampered ?
As a war resister my answer can only be one, I see neither
bravery nor sacrifice in destroying life or property for offence
or defence. I would far rather leave, if I must, my crops and
homestead for the enemy to use than destroy them for the
sake of preventing their use by him. There is reason, sacrifice
and even bravery in so leaving my homestead and crops, if I do
so not out of fear but because I refuse to regard anyone as my
enemy — tliat is, out of a humanitarian motive.
But in India’s case there is, too, a practical consideration.
Unlike Russia’s, India’s masses have no national instinct deve-
loped in the sense that Russia’s have. India is not fighting.
Her conquerors are. Supposing that the conquerors are worsted
and the Japanese come, the inarticulate masses will not even
notice the change for the time being or for a long time. The
intelligentsia are divided on the issue of the war. Tlie motive
here is irrelevant, India’s soldiers are in no sense a national
army. They are soldiers because it is their profession. Tiiey
will as soon fight under the Japanese or any other provided they
are paid for fighting. In these circumstances the policy of
scorched earth would be a wholly indefensible act.
It is therefore a matter for satisfaction that Indian opinion
is being expressed against the policy of scorching. I know
nothing of the requirements of the military, but they can never
be allowed to supersede national or humanitarian considerations
088
SCORCHED EARTH
889 .
which the nation may have accepted. The military must
thus be an arm of the dominant civil power, not its substitute.
The Gfovemment of India will considerably ease the situation
and allay anxiety by declaring in unequivocal terms that they
will not apply, if the occasion ever arise, the scorched earth
policy to India, especial regard being had to her peculiar
position.
Sevagram, 16-3-42
Harijan, 22-3-1942
157
SCORCHED EARTH
Thus writes a correspondent on my article ‘ Scorched Earth ’
in Harijan :
"In your article headed ‘Scorched Earth* appearing in
Harijan of the 22nd. March you say as follows :
‘ As a war resister my answer can only he one. I see neither
bravery nor sacrifice in destroying life or property for ^offence
or defence. I would far rather leave, if I must, my crops and
homestead for the enemy to use than destroy them for the
sake of preventing their use by him. There is reason, sacrifice
and even bravery in so leaving my homestead and crops, if I
do so not out of fear but because I refuse to regard anyone as
my enemy — that is, out of a humanitarian motive.*
Firstly, although I do not approve of the violence which
characterized Russia’s resistance, I am of the view that there
is great bravery and sacrifice in the scorched earth policy which
they are adopting to resist the invader. I cannot, therefore,
understand yoiu: saying that there is neither bravery nor sacri-
fice in destroying property for^defence. Secondly, although you
ask people to resist the invader, you would prefer them to
leave their crops and homestead for the invader to use, not
out of fear but out of a humanitarian motive. I cannot imder-
stand how this can be reconciled with your teaching of resist-
ance to evil. I think that non-violent resistance to the invader
demands it of me that I should prevent anything which will
be of use to him. such as crops or homestead etc., from falling
into his hands even if this means sacrificing my life. May
I request you to clarify this subject because it is of vital
390
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
importance that people should know how they should offer non-
violent resistance to the invader ?
Surely the meaning is plain. There is no bravery in my
poisoning my well or filling it in so that my brother who is at
war with me may not use the water. Let us assume, that I am
fighting him in the orthodox manner. Nor is there sacrifice in
it, for it does not purify me, and sacrifice, as its root meaning
implies, presupposes purity. Such destruction may be likened
to cutting one’s nose to spite one’s face. Warriors of old had
wholesome laws of war. Among the excluded things were
poisoning wells and destroying food crops. But I do claim that
there are bravery and sacrifice in my lea\dng my wells, crops
and homestead intact, bravery in that I deliberately run the risk
of the enemy feeding himself at my expense and pursuing me,
and sacrifice in that the sentiment of leaving something for the
enemy purifies and ennobles me.
My questioner has missed the conditional expression “if
I must ”. I have imagined a state of things in which I am not
prepared just now to die and therefore I want to retreat in an
orderly manner in the hope of resisting imder other and better
auspices. The thing to consider here is not resistance but non-
destruction of food crops and the like. Resistance, violent or
non-violent, has to be well thought out. Thoughtless resistance
will be regarded as bravado in military parlance, and violence
or folly in the language of non-violence. Retreat itself is often
a plan of resistance and may be a precursor of great bravery and
sacrifice. Every retreat is not cowardice which implies fear to
die. Of course a brave man would more often die in violently
or non-violently resisting the aggressor in the latter’s attempt to
oust him from his property, but he will be no less brave if wis-
dom dictates present retreat.
Sevagram, 7-4-42
Harijan, 12-4-1942
158
INHUMAN IF ^RUE
The Honorary Secretary of the Social Service Department
of the Marwari Relief Society writes :
“I have to place before you a very brief review of the
activities of the Marwari Relief Society, Calcutta, in connection
with rendering relief to evacuees from Burma and Malaya,
absolutely irresijective of caste, creed and colour, and also to
humbly seek your invaluable advice on a very grave matter.
The Society has undertaken to provide food, medical aid, and
facilities for repatriation to thousands of helpless refugees who
are arriving in Calcutta daily hy rail,, road and sea. Several
emergent cases of delivery have also been attended to. The
Society is also trying to secure suitable jobs for unemployed
evacuees with the kind co-operation of respectable local firms.
In this connection I beg- to report a certain very regrettable
incident to you, and shall be grateful if you kindly advise me
as to my duties in the matter.
On the night of the 14th March, shortly after the arrival
of the Chittagong Mail, as I, in company with a number of
volunteers, was attending to the wants of the evacuees, a Bri-
tish tommy got hold of a small child belonging to one of the
poor evacuees and threw it under the train. Although I am a
humble follower of your noble creed of non-violence, it was
with the greatest difficulty that I restrained myself and my
volunteers from punishing the soldier bodily for his brutal act.
I reported the matter to the station military authorities, but
their attitude was anything hut sympathetic, I later approach-
ed Mr. K. C. Sen, I.C.S. over the matter, and though he pro-
mised to duly enquire into the matter, nothing has been done
as yet to rectify it. There are still large numbers of ^soldiers
loitering about the platforms every night, and a violent clash
between these soldiers and relief volunteers and the public is
a possibility which has to be tackled in no time. I have already
placed the matter before the Bengal Congress Civil Protection
Committee.
I should be thankful, if you kindly advise me on the fol-
lowing points:
1. Should I start an agitation in the press over the matter ?
2. Supposing a soldier behaves indecently towards a help-
less female evacuee, are we to put up with it silently, or should
the soldier be forcibly dealt with ?
391
392
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
It would help us very greatly, if you kindly issued a state-
ment in Harijan in this connection. I am prepared to accept
all responsibility regarding the truthfulness of the above in-
cident.”
I have suppressed many letters giving me authentic details
about the misbehaviour of soldiers. I have published them when
it would have been wi'ong, if not cowardly, to suppress them.
The letter in question demands, in my opinion, the widest pub-
licity, not merely for the safety of the public but also for the
sake of the soldiers and the Government. The Marwari Relief
Society is a big philanthropic institution of twentyfive years’
standing having an all-India reputation. It has funds and
seasoned workers. Its prestige should have been enough secu-
rity for the good behaviour of the soldiers in the presence of its
workers. The soldier must have rim amuck or been under the
influence of drink to have behaved as he is reported to have done.
I trust that the Marwari Relief Society wiU not leave the matter
till it is thoroughly thrashed out ; and I trust too that the autho-
rities will not wish to hush up the matter but will make ample
amends, if the case is proved as reported by my correspondent.
So much for the case itself. The correspondent desires my
guidance about similar cases in future. The action of himsa or
ahimsa would have been identical. The volunteers should have,
if they could, bodily prevented the soldier from touching the
child or snatched the child from him, even if the soldier had been
hurt in the act of preventing or snatching. The proceedings
after the delivery of the child or the failure of the attempt
would vary according as the deliverers were actuated violently
or non-violently. Non-violent behaviour would dictate generous
and gefitle behaviour towards the culprit. But generosity and
gentleness would have to be thoughtful and reasoned. It is difli-
cult to lay down in advance th^ rule of conduct applicable in all
cases. I can say this much that a truly generous act demands sin-
cere recognition on the part of the culprit. I have known instances
of Africans in South Africa insulted at railwa^^ stations saying
to the rude White men, ** My brother, God will forgive you for
your rudeness,” and the White men giggling, if not adding injury
to insult. In similar circumstances I have myself remained
silent and suffered the insult. I am quite clear that the Africans*
so-called generosity was a mere mechanical act justly evoking
INHUMAN IF TRUE
393
derision. Mine was timidity. I did not wish to evoke further
insult.* I certainly did not want to take legal proceedings. I was
trying then to shape my non-violent conduct. If I had had the
real courage, I would have expostulated with the insulters and
risked the worst.
I have interpolated an examination of so-called non-violent
conduct in cases of personal insult or injury. What about the
child injured or the injury imagined by my correspondent ? I
think non-violent conduct would not, should not, be different.
Tne distinction that is often drawn between personal injury and
injury done to wards is unjustified, if not wrong. A man is not
expected to do more for his wards than he would for himself.
He would no doubt sacrifice himself for his ward’s honour,
but he would be expected to do likewise for his own. If he did
otherwise, he would be voted a coward and is not likely to pro-
tect his ward’s honour, if he is not able to protect his own. But
I own that correct non-violent conduct does not come through
mere reasoning. Reason is a necessary preliminary. But correct-
ness of conduct will come only through repeated practice, maybe
even repeated failures.
What violent conduct should be surely needs nf' examina-
tion.
Sevagram, 23-3-42
Harijan, 29-3-1942
159
QUESTION BOX
Weakening Non-violence ?
Q. In the instructions issued by the Working Committee of
the Congress in the matter of organizing Congress volimteers it
has been clearly stated that the organization should be based on
“ strictly non-violent basis In the pledge forms prepared in
this behalf by some Congress committees, however, it is stated
that volunteers when on duty only should observe non-violence.
The Kamatak P. C. C. has prepared volunteers’ pledge in this
form. The Chief Organizer of volunteers in the Province
appointed by the K. P. C. C. declared in a public meeting held
for the purpose of enrolling volunteers that a Congress volunteer
even on duty might exercise the right of private defence by
resorting to violence in‘ an emergency, and further that such an
action on his part did not contravene the instructions of the
Working Committee. All this is creating confusion. ^ If the
instructions of the Working Committee are not to be strictly
carried out, it would be better that the condition of non-violence
were dropped altogether rather than were allowed to be diluted
to suit individual ideas. What is your opinion ih the matter ?
A. My answers must not be taken as authentic in questions
the answers to which require the imprirrtatur of the Congress
as this one does. My personal opinion.is decisive. Violence in
self-defence haS' no place in any corps organized by or in the
name of the Congress. There can be no laxity in the enforce-
ment of this rule \vithout risking a break-down of the v/hole
non-violent structure in the Congress. Use of violence in pri-
vate self-defence is said to be permitted by the Congress because
the Congress does not and cannot regulate the petsonal and
private life of individual Congressmen. The individual in his
private life is unfettered by the rules of the Congress. He is
dominated by his own ethical code, if any.
Full Faith in Non-violence
Q. There are some Congressmen, though their number is
small, who have full faith in non-\nolence and who desire
394
QUESTION BOX
395
to organize on that basis. Should not Congress committees
organize such men ? Or should not Congress committees allow
such men to form their corps under the auspices'of the Congress ?
A. Congress committees cannot organize sections. The
Congress can have only one policy. Today it is pure non-
violence so far as internal affairs are concerned. Therefore I see
no reason for separate peace committees. Purists, if they are
humble and not self-opinionated, will act as a leaven in bodies
which may contain men and women even of doubtful faith,' as
there must be in democratic organizations.
Bewildering Conflict
Q. There is a bewildering conflict of opinion among Con-
gress leaders. Sardar speaks with one voice, Rajaji with
another, Maulana with a third, and Jawaharlalji with a fourth
— not to speak of the lesser lights. Whom is one to follow, who
is to be regarded as the sole authority to interpret the Congress
policy and resolutions ?
A. Legally and constitutionally the President is the sole
authority. If there is a conflict of opinion between the majority
of the Working Committee and the President, as was’once the
case in the early stages, the majority view would supersede the
President’s. But on critical occasions legal opinion is not of
much value. People have their favourite heroes, and they will
follow the heroes even blindly. My advice, therefore, is that in
the ticklish question of ahimsa each one should be his own
authority not on the law but on interpretation. If all the four
distinguished leaders whom you have mentioned were to sit
together, they could probably give the same interpretation, but
in the course of their speeches each would put his special em-
phasis on one aspect or another of the -same matter.
On the way to Delhi, 26-3-42
Harijan, 5-4-1942
Expedience
Q. Several years ago I once had the temerity to ask
whether the fact that you had allowed non-violence to come
into the Congress as an expedient rather than as a creed would
not be conducive to its breakdown at the critical time. You said
you did not think so. But do you still feel the same ? Would
.*396
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
you not today have had an organized band of believers in non-
violence whom you could have sent in groups all over the coun-
try ? It almost seems as if we had lost time and are found un-
prepared, as it were, to shoulder responsibility.
A. Yes, I adhere to my opinion that I did well to present
to the Congress non-violence as an expedient. I could not
have done otherwise, if I was to introduce it into politics. In
South Africa too I introduced it as an expedient. It was suc-
cessful there because resisters were a small number in a com-
pact area and therefore easily controlled. Here we had num-
berless persons scattered over a huge country. The result was
that they could not be easily controlled or trained. And yet it
is a marvel the way they have responded. They might Have
responded much better and shown far better results. But I
have no sense of disappointment in me over the results obtained.
If I had started with men who accepted non-violence as a creed,
I might have ended with myself. Imperfect as I am, I started
with imperfect men and women and sailed on an uncharted
•ocean. Thank God that, though the boat has not reached its
'haven, it has prov'ed fairly stormproof.
Sevagi^m, 7-4-42
Harijan, 12-4-1942
160
NON-VIOLENT RESISTANCE
Japan is knocking at our gates. What are we to do in a.
non-violent way? If we were a free country, things could be-
done non-violently to prevent the Japanese from entering the-
country. As it is, non-violent resistance could commence the-
moment they effected a landing. Thus non-violent resisters
would refuse them any help, even water. For it is no part of
their duty to help anyone to steal their country. But if a Japa-
nese had missed his way and was dying of thirst and sought
help as a human being, a non-violent resister, who may not
regard anyone as his enemy, would give water to the thirsty
one. Suppose the Japanese compel resisters to give them water,
the resisters must die in the act of resistance. It is conceivable-
that they will exterminate all resisters. The underlying belief
in such non-violent resistance is that the aggressor will, in time,
be mentally and even physically tired of killing non-violent
resisters. He will begin to search what this new (for him) force-
is which refuses co-operation without seeking to hurt, and will
probably desist from further slaughter. But the resisters may
find that the Japanese are utterly heartless and that they do
not care how many they kill. The non-violent resisters will
have won the day inasmuch as they will have preferred exter-
mination to submission.
Blit things will not happen quite so simply as I have put
them. I There are at least four parties in the country. First,
the British and the army they have brought into being. The-
Japanese declare that they have no designs upon India. Their
quarrel is only with the British. In this they are assisted- by
some Indians who are in Japan. It is difficult to guess ho-w
many, but there must be a fairly large number who believe in
the declaration of the Japanese and think that they -will deliver
the country from the British yoke and retire. Even if the worst
happens, their fatigue of the British yoke is so great that they
would even welcome the Japanese yoke for a change. This is
the second party. The third are the neutrals, who though not
non-violent will help neither the British nor the Japanese,
397
398
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
The fourth and last are non-violent resisters. If they are
only a few, their resistance will be ineffective except as an
example for the future. Such resisters will calmly die wherever
they are buiwiU not bend the knee before the aggressor. They
will not be deceived by promises. They do not seek deliverance
from the British yoke through the help of a third party. They
believe implicitly in their own way of fighting and no other.
Their fight is on behalf of the dumb millions who do not per-
haps know that there is such a thing as deliverance. They
have neither hatred for the British nor love for the Japanese.
They wish well to both as to all others. They would like both
to do what is right. They believe that non-violence alone will
lead men to do right xmder all circumstances. Therefore, if
for want of enough companions non-violent resisters cannot
reach the goal, they will not give up their way but pursue it to
death.
The task before the votaries of non-violence is very diffi-
cult. But no difficulty can baffle men who have faith in their
mission.
This is going to be a long drawn out agony. Let non-violent
resisters not make impossible attempts. Their powers are
limited. A resister in Kerala is not physically responsible for
the defence of Assam which is just now in imminent danger.
If Assam is non-violently inclined, it is well able to take care
of itself. If it is not, no party of non-violent resisters from
Kerala can help it or any other province. Kerala can help
Assam etc. by demonstrating its non-violence in Kerala itself.
The Japanese army, if it gets a foothold in India, will not stop
at Assam. In order to defeat the British, it has to overrun the
whole country. The British will fight every inch of the ground.
Loss of India 'will probably be admission of complete defeat for
them. But whether it is so or not, it is quite clear that Japan
will not rest till India is wholly in her hands. Hence non-
violent resisters must remain at their posts wherever they are.
One thing has to be made clear. Where the British army is
actually engaging the ‘ enemy ’, it would be perhaps improper
for direct resistance to function. It will not be non-viotent
resistance when it is mixed with, or allies itself to, \dolence.
Let me therefore reiterate what I have said so often. The
best preparation for, and even the expression of, non-violence
TO EVERY BRITON
899
lies in the determined pursuit of the constructive programme.
Anyone who believes that without the backing of the construc-
tive programme he will show non-violent strength when the
testing time comes will fail miserably. It will be, like the
attempt of a starving unarmed man to^ match his physical
strength against a fully fed and panoplied soldier, foredoomed
to failure. He who has no belief in the constructive programme
has, in my opinion, no concrete feeling for the starved millions.
He who is devoid of that feeling cannot fight non-violently. In
actual practice the expansion of my non-violence has .kept exact
pace with that of my identification with starved humanity. I
am still far from the non-violence of my conception, for am I
not still far away from the identification of my conception with
dumb humanity ?
On the train to Wardha, 5-4-42
Harijariy, 12-4-1942
161
TO EVERY BRITON
When I had just begun my public career in South Africa I
wrote “ An Open Letter to Every Briton in South Africa ”, It
had its effect. I feel that I shoidd repeat the example at this
critical juncture iri the history of the world. This time my
appeal must be to every Briton in the world. He may be nobody
in the coimsels of his nation. But in the empire of non-violence
every true thought counts, every true voice has its full value.
Vox populi vox dei is not a copy-book maxim. It is an expres-
sion of the solid experience of mankind. But it has one quali-
fication. Its truth is confined to the field of non-violence. Vio-
lence can for the moment completely frustrate a people’s voice.
But since I work on the field of non-violence only, every true
thought expressed or unexpressed counts for me.
I ask every Briton to support me in my appeal to the British
at this very hour to retire from every Asiatic and African
possession and at least from India. That step is essential for
the safety of the world and for the destruction of Nazism and
Fascism. In this I include Japan’s ‘ ism ’ also. It is a good copy^
of the two. Acceptance of my appeal will confound all the
400
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE ‘AND WAR
miJitary plans of all the Axis Powers and even of the militarj"
advisers of Great Britain.
If my appeal goes home, I am sure the cost of British in-
terests in India and Africa would be nothing compared to the
present ever-growing cost of the war to Britain. And when one
puts morals in the scales, there is nothing but gain to Britain,
India and the world.
Though I ask for their withdrawal from Asia and Africa, let
me confine myself for the moment to India, British statesmen
tallc glibly of India’s participation in the war. Now India was
never even formally consulted on the declaration of war. Why
should it be ? India does not belong to Indians. It belongs to
the British. It has been even called a British possession. The
British practically do with it as they like. They make me — an
aU-war resister — pay a war tax in a variety of ways. Thus
I pay two pice as war tax on every letter I post, one pice on
every postcard, and two annas on every wire I send. This is
the lightest side of the dismal picture. But it shows British
ingenuity. If I was a student of economics, I could produce
startling figures as to what India has been made to pay towards
the war apart from what are miscalled voluntary contributions..
No contribution made to a conqueror can be truly described as
voluntary. What a conqueror the Briton makes ! He is well
saddled in his seat. I do not exaggerate \yhen I say that a
whisper of his wish is promptly answered in India. Britain
may, therefore, be said to be at perpetual war with India which
she holds by right of conquest and through an army of occupa-
tion. How does India profit by this enforced participation in
Britain’s war ? The bravery of Indian soldiers profits India
nothing. . *
Before the Japanese menace overtakes India, India’s home-
steads are being occupied by British troops — Indian and non-
Indian. The dwellers are siunmarily ejected and expected to
shift for themselves. They are paid a paltry vacating expense
which carries them nowhere. Tlieir occupation is gone. They
have to build their cottages and search for their livelihood.
These people do not vacate out of a spirit of patriotism. When
this incident was referred to me a few days ago, I v/rote in
these columns that the dispossessed people should be asked to-
bear their lot with resignation. But my co-workers protested
•OS pip T?JiturBA\qsT^ msiy-
•}i spuy oq J3AajaqA\ pooj o; jjasuiiq d^aq piAv xroui Sutaob^s y
•A\Bi ou SA\ouq X^issooa^ 'uot^naosojd jo qsu aqj -usas ^ibs
ojnpBjnuBui o; uiaqi ospvpB ppioAv j ptrv 'ubo Xaqi aaAaaaqAv
?IBS ajnjDBjnuBui oj a^doad AAono puB ?dB(J UTAVjj-iqpuBO ut ;tBS
oj Stnjjajaj osnBp aqj no uoipna;snoo ^sapiAv aq; ;nd ?u3in
-UJOAOj) oq^ ;Bq; gutdoq uib j 'apis aiaq;. iio XnoqAV sr ^qSu ;nq
‘apis s.aidoad aq; uo aqnb lou st a\bi aqi 'aaiiUBj iqBS o; sy
•suoi^B^s asoqi
50 pijojBo aJB sdooa; aq; os ‘aouajap-jias joj saAtasuiaq; papuBq
aABq sjaqAVBq mjo|;Bid ‘q;jou aq; ui suoi;b;s aq; ^b ?Bq; am
pioj njqa^i ^rpuEj -poo xp ^b pauunqs aq ?snui %i 'XxuBuran
puB aoipiBAVoa aprejc sr ajaq xioipBui *axqBjnonoq pire XjBSsaoau
qxoq sr abav xuaioiA aqx XqBJnxBu auioo xou saop ^Bqx ajaqAi ?nq
qsaq aqx sXBAqB st Xbav xuaxotA-uou aq; iqnop ofj -asuB ;ou
saop aouapiA puB aouaioiA-uoti 50 uoi^sanb aqj, ’aJB Xaq; oqAV
ja;;Bur ou ‘siBnpiAtpm SutABqaqsiui ;suibSb saAtasuiaq; puajap
o; ujEaj aiaqAvXjaAa ;snui a^dooti •suoi;BjBdajd XiB;qTui aoj
paSoS}jouiajd qa st ;t uaqA^ ‘aaou os ajoui ‘aAoui 0; A\ots sXba\xb
sf XaauiqoBUi ;uatnujaAoo aqjt ’apis Jiaq; uo XxxoqAV uoiu
-ido ojiqnd puB a\B[ aq; aABq a^doad aq; uia;; ;sjy aq; uq
•jaq;o aq; uo
suBipuj puB puBq auo aq; uo suBUiang;- 0 |Suv PUB suBipui-oiSuv
puB suEadoing; uaaAv;aq uoT;BUTunjosTp (g) ‘XiB;qTUi aq; jo aqas
aq; joj uoi;BnoBAa (f) ‘sutBig pooj 50 xoj;uoo (0) ‘auruiBj ;xbs
S uipuadun aq; (g) ‘sdooi; jo JnoiABqaq aq; (i) q;TAi uoT;oaunoa
ut st siqj, ‘XBA\Bjpq;tAV qsi;tja; Joj xBsodoad aq; jo aAt;oadsajjr
uoi;oB ogtoads spuBuiap puB Xaiap ou jo s;TUipB ;sjg: aqj,
•amt; 0; amt; mojj astjB Xaq; sb suot;sanb aq;
q;iAV XBap o; X;ixtqB Xm jo ;saq aq; 0; SutXj; ure i •suot;Baqdun
s;i ;noqB uoisnjuoo jo ;ox b st aiaqi ‘XBxap jo s;turpB puooas
aqi •XoBmaidns qst;tjg uiojg: raopaaij amoas o; jaq;o aq; puB
‘XouaSjama ;uasajd aq; q;tA\ xaap o; st auQ ■suot;ob oa\; sbaxoa
-UI jaAVOd qsi;tja; aq; jo XBAVBjpq;tAv aq; joj x^sodoid
SMOUOV OAU
163
LETTER TO THE GENERALISSIMO
{The following letter had been’ addressed to Generalissimo Chiang
Kai-Shek by Gandhiju — ^Ed.)
Sevagram,
Jiine 14, 1942
Dear Generalissimo,
I can never forget the five hours’ close contact I had with
you and your noble wife in Calcutta. I had always felt drawn
towards you in yout fight for freedom, and that contact and
our conversation brought China and her problem still nearer to
me. Long ago, between 1905 and 1913, when I was in South
Africa, I was in constant touch with the small Chinese colony
in Johannesburg. I loiew them first as clients and then as com-
rades in the Indian passive resistance struggle in South Africa.
I came in touch with them in Mauritius also; I learnt then* to
admire their thrift, industry, resourcefulness and internal unity.
Later in India I had a very fine Chinese friend living with me
for a few years and we all learnt to like him.
I have thus felt ^eatly attracted towards your great coim-
try and, in common with my countrymen, our sympathy has
gone out to you in your terrible struggle. Our mutual friend,.
Jawaharlal Nehru, whose love of China is only excelled, if at
aU by his love of his own country, has kept us in intimate touch
with the developments of the Chinese struggle.
Because of this feehng I have towards China and my
earnest desire that our two great countries should come closer
to one another and co-operate to their mutual advantage, I am
anxious to explain tb‘ you that my appeal to the British Power
to withdraw from India is not meant in any shape or form to
weaken India’s defence against the Japanese or embarrass you
in your struggle. India must not submit to any aggressor or
invader and must resist him. I would not be guilty of purchas-
ing the freedom of my country at the cost of your country’s
freedom. That problem does not arise before me as I am clear
that India cannot gain her freedom in this way, and a Japanese
40 1
LETTER TO THE GENERALISSIMO
405
domination of either India or China would be equally injurious
to the other country and to world peace. That domination must
therefore be prevented and I should like India to play her natu-
ral and rightful part in this.
I feel India cannot do so while she is in bondage. India has
been a helpless witness of the withdrawals from Malaya, Singa-
pore and Burma. We must learn the lesson from these tragic
events and prevent by all means at our disposal a repetition of
what befell these unfortunate countries. But unless we are free
we can do nothing to prevent it, and the same process might
well occur again, crippling India and China disastrously. I do
not want a repetition of this tragic tale of woe.
Our proffered help has repeatedly been rejected by the Bri-
tish Government and the recent failure of the Cripps mission
has left a deep wound which is still running. Out of that
anguish has come the cry for immediate withdrawal of British
Power so that India can look after herself and help China to
the best of her ability.
I have told you of my faith in non-violence and my belief in
the effectiveness of this method if the whole nation could turn
to it. That faith in it is as firm as ever. But I realize that India
today as a whole has not that faith and belief, and the Govern-
ment in free India would be formed from the various elements
composing the nation.
Today the whole of India is impotent and feels frustrated.
The Indian army consists largely of people who have joined up
because of economic pressure. They have no feeling of a cause
to fight for, and in no sense are they a national army. Those
of us, who would fight for a cause, for India and China, with
armed forces or with non-violence, cannot, under the foreign
heel, function as they want to. And yet our people know for
certain that India free can play even a decisive part not only on
her own behalf, but also on behalf of China and world peace.
Many like me feel that it is not proper or manly to remain in
this helpless state and allow events to overwhelm us when a
way to effective action can be opened to us. They feel, there-
fore, that every possible effort should.be made to ensure inde-
pendence and that freedom of action which is so urgently needed.
This is the origin of my appeal to the British Power to end
406
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
immediately the unnaturar connection between Britain and
India,
Unless we make the effort there is grave danger of public
feeling in India going into wrong and harmful channels. There
is every likelihood of subterranean sympathy for Japan grow-
ing simply in order to weaken and oust British authority in
India. This feeling may take the place of robust confidence in
our ability never to look to outsiders for help in \vinning our
freedom. We have to learn self-reliance and develop the strength
to work out our own salvation. This is only possible if we make
a determined eSort to free ourselves from bondage. That free-
dom has become a present necessity to enable us to take our due
place among the free nations of the world.
To make it perfectly clear that we want to prevent in every
way Japanese aggression, I would personally agree, that the
Allied Powers might, under treaty with us, keep their armed
forces in India and use the country as a base for operation
against the threatened Japanese attack.
I need hardly give you my assurance that, as the author of
the new move in India, I shall take no hasty action. And what-
ever action I may recommend will be governed by the consider-
ation that it should not injure China, or encourage Japanese
aggression in India or China. I am trying to enlist world opi-
nion in favour of a proposition which to me appears self-proved
and which must lead to the strengthening of India’s and China’s
defence. I am also educating public opinion in India and con-
ferring with my colleagues. Needless to say, any movement
against the British Gk>vemment with which I may be connected
will be essentially non-violent. I am straining every nerve to
avoid a conflict with British authority. But if in the vindicatfon
of the freedom which has become an immediate desideratum,
this becomes inevitable, I shall not hesitate to run any risk
however great.
Very soon you will have completed five years of war against
Japanese aggression and invasion and all the sorrow and misery
that these have brought to China. My heart goes out to the
people of China in deep sympathy and in admiration for their
heroic struggle and endless sacrifices in the cause of their coim-
try’s freedom and integrity against tremendous odds. I am con-
vinced that this heroism and sacrifice cannot be in vain ; they
TO EVERY JAPANESE
407
must bear fruit. To you, to Madame Chiang and to the great
people of China, I send my earnest and sincere wishes for yoiu:
success. I look forward to the day when a free India and a free
China will co-operate together in friendship and brotherhood
for their own good and for the good of Asia and the world.
In anticipation of your permission, I am taking liberty of
publishing this letter in Harijan.
Yours sincerely,
Sd. M, K. GANDHI
164
TO EVERY JAPANESE
I must confess at the outset that, though I have no ill-will
against you, I intensely dislike your attack upon China, From
your lofty height you have descended to imperial ambition.
You will fail to realize that ambition and may become the
authors of the dismemberment of Asia, thus rmwittingly pre-
venting world federation and brotherhood without which there
can be no hope for humanity.
Ever since I was a lad of eighteen studying in London over
fifty years ago, I learnt, through the writings of the late Sir
Edwin Arnold, to prize the many excellent qualities of your
nation. I was thrilled when in South Africa I learnt of yoxu
brilliant victory over Russian arms. After my return to India
from South Africa in 1915, I came in close touch with Japanese
monks who lived as members of our Ashram from time to time.
One of them became a valuable member of the Ashram in Seva-
gram, and his application to duty, his dignified bearing, his un-
failing devotion to daily worship, affability, unruffiedness under
varying circumstances, and his natural smile which was positive
evidence of his inner peace had endeared him to all of us. And
now that owing to your declaration of war against Great Britain
he has been taken away from us, we miss him as a dear co-
worker, He has left behind him as a memory his daily prayer
and his little drum, to the accompaniment of which we open
our morning and evening prayers.
408
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
In the background of these pleasant recollections I grieve
deeply as I contemplate what appears to me to be your unpro-
voked attack against China and, if reports are to be believed,
your merciless devastation of that great and ancient lancL
It was a v/orthy ambition of yours to take equal rank with
the Great Powers of the world. Your aggression against China
and your alliance with the Axis Powers was surely an un-
warranted excess of that ambition.
I should have thought that you would be proud of the fact
that that great and ancient people, whose old classical literature
you have adopted as your own, are your neighbours. Your
understanding of one another’s history, tradition, literature
should bind you as friends rather than make you the enemies
you are today.
If I was a free man, and if you allowed me to come to your
country, frail though I am, I would not mind risking my health,
maybe my life, to come to your coimtry to plead with you to
desist from the wrong you are doing to China and the world
and therefore to yourself.
But I enjoy no such freedom. And we are in the imique
position of having to resist an imperialism that we detest no less
than yours and Nazism. Our resistance to it ‘ does not mean
harm to the British people. We seek to convert them. Ours
is an imarmed revolt against British rule. An important party
ih the country is engaged in a deadly but friendly quarrel with
the foreign rulers.
But in this they need no aid from foreign Powers. You
have been gravely misinformed, as I know you are, that we
have chosen this particular moment to embarrass the Allies
when your attack against India is imminent. If we wanted to
turn Britain’s difficult^’’ into our opportunity we should have
done it as soon as the war broke out nearly three years ago.
Our movement demanding the withdrawal of the British
Power from India should in no way be misunderstood. In fact,
if we are to believe your reported anxiety for the independence
of India, a recognition of that independence by Britain should
leave you no excuse for* any attack on India. Moreover the
reported profession sorts ill with your ruthless aggression
against China.
TO EVERY JAPANESE
409
2, 1-1 rk alDOiit tliG fsct tlicit you.
I would ask you to ir^ uplieve that you will receive a
wiU be sadly disillusioned i you movement
willing welcome from n a^ j.g by making her free
for British withdrawal to p ^ ^ ambition, whether
for resisting all militans or yom pattern.
it is called British ^ [“o^le spectetors^of the mili-
If we do not, we shall have be g non-violence
tarization of the world in spi niiUtarist spirit and ambition,
we have the only solvent of ^^arist sp
Personally I fear that -‘"f Axis com-
India the Allied Powers y"- pp tn the dignity of a religion.
' bination which has raised vio partners unless they beat
The Allies cannot beat copy it their
you in your ruthless and s i -vvorld for democracy and
declaration that they will sav _ j ^gei t^at they can
individual freedom must ® ruthlessness by de-
only gain strength to avoi c India, and turning
daring and recogmzing now th India’s voluntary
sullen India’s forced co-operation into treed
co-operation; ov^npaled in the name of
To Britain and the Allies jp their ov/n self-
justice, in proof of their pro humanity. It is a
interest. To you I appea ruthless warfare is
marvel to me that you do not p„„er will
nobody’s monopoly. If pihnd and beat you with your
certainly improve upon your in leave no legacy to your
own weapon. Even if Sey cannot take pride
people of which they would feel proud^^^^^
in a recital of cruel deeds j^ght,
■ Even if you win it will not pro was greater,
it wiU only prove that tgo, unless they perforin
This applies obviously to freeing India as an earnest
7 «no the just all other subject peoples m
and promise of similarly freei g
Asia and Africa. u^jg offer of Free
Our appeal to Britairi is coup ® troops in India.
India’s willingness to let the AUi ^py way
The offer is made in order to pro prevent you
mean to harm the Allied Zve but to step into
irom being misled into feehng that you n
410
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
the country that Britain has vacated. Needless to repeat that
if you cherish any such idea and will carry it out, we will not
fail in resisting you with all the might that our country can
muster. I address this appeal to you in the hope that our move-
ment may even influence you and your partners in the right
direction and deflect you and them from the course which is
bound to end in your moral ruin and the reduction of human
beings to robots.
The hope of your response to my appeal is much fainter
than that of response from Britain. I know that the British
are not devoid of a sense of justice and they know me. I do
not know you enough to be able to judge. All I have read tells
me that you listen to no appeal but to the sword. How I wish
that you are cruelly misrepresented and that I shall touch the
right chord in your heart ! Any way I have an imdying faith
in the responsiveness of human nature. On the strength of
that faith I have conceived the impending movement in India,
and it is that faith which has prompted this appeal to you.
I am
Your friend and well-wisher,
M. K. GANDHI
Sevagiam, 18-7-42
Harijan, 26-7-1942
165
fastdig in non-violent action
If the struggle ^ ifm^t
might has to '* to play an important part
in order to succeed, fasti g P authority and with
in it. It has its place in tte t^l^»
OUT own people in the event oi w
obstinate riots for instance. 4. -t „<- riart of a political
There is a natural faSous plctiL But
struggle. It has a reco^ P rnDhtics by the ordinary
it is considered a vulgar interpo a to by prisoners in
poUtician though it has ^gcess. By fasting, however,
a haphazard v/ay with more or ^ public attention and
they have always succeeded m drawng p
disturbing the peace of jail au on • ^ictly according
My own fasts have always - I Md " J
to the law of satyagrdha. F iiscve been varied.
Africa fasted partially or who F* 21 days in 1924
There was the Hindu-Mushm pj roof in Delhi,
.started under the late Manila l^acDonald Award was
The indeterminate fast agains rm^e 21 days’ purificatory
taken in the Yeravda Prison m l • , finished at
fast was begun in the ^ -would not take the bur-
Lady Thakersey’s, as the condition. Then followed
den of my being in the prison m against the Gov-
another Lst hf the Yeravda P^°^^^^^Jf.^Sability work
emment refusal to let me carry same basis as faci-
through Harijan (issued from prison) They would not
lities Ld been allowed me four months before,
yield, but they discharged last was not given up.
thought I could not live many d y 1939. A false step
Then followed the ill-fated Ba] o -thwarted the brU-
taken by me thoughtlessly durmg , l,gen achieved,
liant result that would otherwise ce been accepted as a
In spite of all these fasts, been tolerated by-
recognized part of satyagToha.
411
412
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
the politicians. I have however been driven to the conclusion
that fasting unto death is an integral part of satyagraha pro-
gramme, and it is the greatest and most effective weapon in
its armoury under given circumstances. Not every one is
qualified for undertaking it without a proper course of training.
I may not burden this note with an examination of the cir-
cumstances under which fasting may be resorted to and the
training required for it. Non-violence in its positive aspect as
benevolence (I do not use the word love as it has fallen into
disrepute) is the greatest force because of the limitless scope it
affords for self-suffering without causing or intending any
* physical or material injury to the wrong-doer. The object
always is to evoke the best in him. Self-suffering is an appeal
to his better nature, as retaliation is to his baser. Fasting under
proper circumstances is such an appeal par excellence. If the
politician does not perceive its propriety in political matters, it
is because it is a novel use of this very fine v/eapon.
To practise non-violence in mundane matters is to knov/ its
true value. It is to bring heaven upon earth. There is no such
thing as the other world. All worlds are one. There is no
‘ here ’ and no ‘ there As Jeans has demonstrated, the whole
universe including the most distant stars, invisible even through
the most powerful telescope in the world, is compressed in an
atom. I hold it therefore to be wrong to limit the use of non-
violence to cave dwellers and for acquiring merit for a favoured
position in the other world. All virtue ceases to have use if it
serves no purpose in every walk of life. I would therefore plead
Avith the purely political-minded people to study non-violence
and fasting as its extreme manifestation with sympathy and
understanding.
Sevagram, 20-7-42
Harijan, 26-7-1942
166
TO ARIERICAN FRIENDS
Dear Friends,
As I am supposed to be the spirit behind the much discussed
and equally well abused resolution of the Working Committee
of the Indian National Congress on Independence, it has become
necessary for me to explain my position. For I am not unknown
to you. I have in America perhaps the largest number of
friends in the West — not even excepting Great Britain. British"
friends knowing me personally are more discerning than the
American. In America I suffer from the weU-known malady
called hero-worship. Good Dr. Holmes, until recently of the
Unity Church of New York, without knov/ing me personally
became my advertising agent. Some of the nice things he said
about me I never knew myself. So I receive often embarrassing
letters from America expecting me to perform miracles. Dr.
Holmes was followed much later by the late Bishop Fisher who
knew me personally in India. He very' nearly dragged me
to America but fates had ordained otherwise and I could not
visit your vast and great country v/ith its wonderful people.
Moreover, you have' given me a teacher in Thoreau, who
furnished me through his essay on the ‘Duty of Civil Disobe-
dience ’ scientific ' confirmation of what I was • doing in South
Africa. Great Britain gave me Ruskin, whose ‘ Unto This Last ’
transformed^me "overnight from a lawyer and city-dweller into
a rustic living away from Durban on a farm, three miles from
the nearest railway station ; and Russia gave me m Tolstoy a
teacher who furnished a reasoned basis for mj' non-violence.
He’ blessed my movement in South Africa when it was stiU in
its infancy and of whose wonderful possibilities I had yet to
learn. It was he who had prophesied in his letter to me- that
I was leading a movement which was destined to bring a
message of hope to the down-trodden people of the earth. So
you win see that I have not approached the present task in any
spirit of enmity to Great Britain and the West. After having
imbibed and assimilated the message of ‘Unto This Last’, I
413
414
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AITO WAR
could not be guilty of approving of Fascism or Nazism, whose
cult is suppression of the individual and his liberty.
I invite you to read my formula of withdrawal or as it has
been popularly called ‘ Quit India ’ with this background. You
may not read into it more than the context warrants.
I claim to be a votary of truth from my childhood. It was
the most natural thing to me. My prayerful search gave me the
reveahng maxim ‘ Truth is God ^ instead of the usual one * Gk>d
is Truth That maxim enables me to see God face to face as it
were. I feel Him peiv^ade every fibre of my being. With this Truth
as witness between you and me, I assert that I woidd not have
asked my coxmtry to in\dte Great Britain to withdraw her rule
over India, irrespective of any demand to the contraiy% if I had
not seen at once that, for the sake of Great Britain and the
Allied cause, it was necessary for Britain boldly to perform the
duty of freeing India from bondage. Without this essential act
of tardy justice, Britain could not justify her position before the
unmurmuring World Conscience, which is there nevertheless.
Singapore, Malaya and Burma taught me that the disaster must
not be repeated in India. I make bold to say that it cannot be
averted unless Britain trusts the people of India to use their
liberty in favour of the Allied cause. By that supreme act of
justice Britain would have taken away all cause for the seething
discontent of India. She ^vill turn the growing ill-will into
active goodwilL I submit that it is worth all the battleships
and airships that your wonder-working engineers and financial
resources can produce.
I know that interested propaganda has filled your ears stnd
eyes with distorted versions of the Congress position. I have
been painted as a hypocrite and enemy of Britain imder disguise.
My demonstrable spirit of accommodation has been described
as my inconsistency, proving me to be .an utterly imreliable
man. I am not going to burden this letter with proof in sup-
port of my assertions. If the credit I have enjoyed in America
wiU not stand me in good stead, nothing I may argue in self-
defence will carry comdction against the formidable but false
propaganda that has poisoned American ears.
You have made common cause wdth Great Britain. You
cannot therefore disowm responsibility for anything that her
representatives do in India. You will do a grievous wrong to
TO AMERICAN FRIENDS
415
the Allied cause, if you do not sift the truth from the chaff
whilst there is yet time. Just think of it. Is there anything
wrong in the Congress demanding unconditional recognition of
India’s independence ? It is being said, ‘ But this is not the
time.’ We say, ‘This is the psychological moment for that recog-
nition. For then and then only can there be irresistible opposi-
tion to Japanese aggression. It is of immense value to the
Allied cause if it is also of equal value to India. The Congress
has anticipated and provided for every possible difficulty in the
•way of recognition. I want you to look upon the immediate
recognition of India’s independence as a war measure of first
class magnitude.
I am.
On the way to Bombay, 3-8-42 Yoiur Friend,
Harijan, 9-8-1942 M. K. GANDHI
Appendices
I
WAR AGAINST WAR
{By B, de Ligt)
TRevw B. de Ligt of Oned, Geneva, it will be remembered,
wrote an open letter to me last year on my attitude towards
war especially in view of my participation in the Boer War,
the Zulu Rebellion in Natal and the late War. The open letter
was published in the European Press, and I satisfied myself
with merely publishing my reply ^ in these pages without pub-
lishing the former. The reverend gentleman has now sent me
a rejoinder which he calls second open letter, and would have
me to publish his letter. Although it is too long for these pages
I may not resist the writer’s request. He has taken great pains
over his composition, and I appreciate the interest peace lovers
in the West are taking in my views and conduct, I am pub-
lishing the letter in two parts. And after the conclusion of the
second part I hope to write out a brief reply, t M. K. G.l
I
It is in the name of all those who, throughout the world,
are fighting against the terrible mania for violence which is
ravaging the universe, that I thank you for having Idndly
replied, so frankly and precisely, to my open letter of May, 1928.
Your reply cuts both ways. It is reassuring on the one side,
but disappointing on the other. From the point of view of imme-
diate opposition to war, it is of great importance that you should
have declared openly that you no longer wish to participate in
any combat whatsoever on behalf of England. If the masses
who are with you are ready to oppose, at critical moments, any
war movement on the part of the Government in London, no
longer desiring to give either their gold or their blood, the^^
become a real factor for peace.
As I already wrote you, movements are being born today
throughout the whole world, and spreading continuously, to*
* Cliapter 30, p. 73, in this book,
t Chapter 3G, p. 80, in this book.
416
WAR AGAINST WAR
417
-f
oppose war. You may be sure that your courageous declaration
is received in those quarters with joy.
Moreover, you have recognized without circumlocution that
the work of the Red Cross forms part of the gigantic machinery
of war. This declaration was confirmed by the impressive state-
ment of the American nursing sister, who sent back to the
French Government her Croix de Guerre because she had finally
become convinced that all her so-called humanitarian work had
been, on the whole, only a refined sort of war work. By a
happy coincidence, this statem^ent was published in the same
number of The World Tomorrow (November 1928) as the
report of our correspondence. This statenjent was further con-
firmed by the letter of Albert de Jong, Secretary of the Interna-
tional Anti-militarist Bureau, to the Xlllth Conference of the
Red Cross at the Hague, showing how this institution, willy nilly,
is today forced even to collaborate in the perfecting of war
gases. In the same manner, you also are helping us to tear the
veil from the face of false charities, under cover of which the
militarists of all countries are trying to arouse at least a little
sympathy for ^nationaF defence^ in good-hearted men and
women.
On the other hand, however, your reply has caused in
Western countries profoimd disappointment. For, in the main,
you have accepted rather than rejected war, if not on your
own behalf, at least, in principle, for your people. At the pre-
sent time you are, happily, against India’s participation in any
war whatsoever imdertaken by the British Empire. But, tmtll
when ? If, for instance, in a short time, a Macdonald Govern-
ment is formed in England and it should be tactician enough to
make advances to you with regard to Home Rule and to give
you, at least formally, the reward which you vainly hoped to
obtain by participating in the war of 1914-1918, what would you
do, if that friendly Government let itself be driven into a new
war ? That is a burning question. Do not say that such a war
is impossible. Everywhere one is preparing for it, even more
than before 19141 Politicians are already speaking of an, even-
tual war between the United States and England ; strategists
and technicians are studying it. And like any other socialist
Government, an English socialist Government would continue
the tradition of * national defence ’ ; it would in any case be
418
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
ready to go to war on behalf of the League of Nations, that trust
of modern imperialism whose fatal character I have made mani-
fest in my book Contre la Qiierre Nouvelle which I liave sent
to you. Macdonald, who was formerly among the conscientious
objectors, has just declared that- as a practical man it is for him
impossible to renoxmce the force of arms.
That is why your reply, however frank and courageous it
may be, can reassure us, alas, but very relatively.
As I have already written you, I also do not hold to a dog-
matic point of view of non-violence. I recognize impartially the
right of any oppressed class or race to liberate itself by means of
arms. I grant that from a moral point of view a people which
defends itself militarily does better than if it did not defend
itself at all Ijecause of cowardice or lack of character — although
I can quite well imagine a people which, urged by worthy huma-
nitarian sentiments, renounces war methods, even .while still
incapable of liberating itself by higher means. But today the
international situation has changed so much that such an affir-
mation can only have quite an abstract sense. Modern warfare
has become a technical-industrial system, so complicated and so
refined that for many years to come coloured races will not ’be
able to employ it against the hypercivili^ed 'barbarians who
have been unconsciously preparing themselves for it for a few
centuries past, and have been consciously adapting themselves
to it for the last hundred years or so. The surest arm, especially
for coloured races, is non-violent resistance. Their objective
right of armed resistance is becoming, from the practical point
of view, something more and more academic. By the force of
things, oppressed races are even obliged to make, so to speak,
a virtue of necessity. For that their minds are, fortunately, very
favourably constituted, as was shown by your experiences in
Africa^ and in India and by the success of the general strikes
and the boycott in China.
All that, moreover, is taking place at a time when the
Western nations are beginning to recognize that they must
renounce war, the latter becoming more and more a fatal peril
for victors as well as for vanquished. The man of the West risks
becoming the victim of his destructive machines : he can no
longer control them. ‘‘Our civilization,’* writes Hans Prager,
in a little book about yourself, “ bides behind a very virile mask
WAR AGAINST WAR
419
our moral weakness, our fear. We are no longer warriors, but
mere servants of lifeless machines. Heroic war has turned
away from Europe. Soon it will no longer be the men who will
take up arms, but the machines which will take up men. That
which makes the pride of man, his inventive genius, will become
his shame for haThng created machinery which prevents his
defending himseK any more by his own strength.’^ This double
fact — that while the coloured races are not masters of the
means of modern warfare, the modern nations are themselves
mastered by these means — constitutes what seems to me the
right starting point in order to try to win over all peoples of aU
races to a united and powerful direct action against war.
I am, therefore, not an absolutist, bestriding some obsolete
hobby. Although detesting all vulgar opportunism, I understand
perfectly your statement as to the necessity for compromise in
order to be able to live and to act. I also feel for you profoundly
in your moral difficulties concerning the need of defending your
crops by force against the monkeys. As a vegetarian who has
lived the^eater part of his life in the country, I know by*bitter
experience that ahimsa can only be applied in quite a. relative
manner. The interesting publications on plants of your eminent
compatriot, J. C. Bose, render this question still more compli-
cated. In any case, as regards animals, you hope, with good
reason, to reach one day a more satisfactory solution.* You will
understand, therefore, how I hope still" more to reach, as regards
men, a better solution than this false solution of international
questions by means of war, especially the ‘ total war ’ of modern
times. And I reckon upon attaining my object in this field more
quickly than in others, because our political and social enemies
are neither beasts nor plants, but living beings endowed with
intelligence and human conscience. That, indeed, is the reason
why your example concerning the monkeys has scarcely con-
vinced me as an explanation of your conduct towards the Zulus,
the Boers, and the Central Powers.
Just while preparing this letter I heard that your intimate
frierid, the Rev. C. F. Andrews, had arrived at Geneva. In the-
course of a conversation I had with him, you and your work,
you may be sure, were the principle topic of discussion, the more
so as he was engaged in the composition of a book on your con-
ception of the world and your ideas concerning life and morality,
420
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND V7AB
from the point of view of Sv/araj. During those unforget-
table hours, he described to me 3 *our life, spoke 4o me of your
devotion to India, a work v/hich seemed to be extending more
and more until finally its influence should embrace the universe.
You, who desired only to be a simple servant of India, have
become, little by little, one of the moral leaders of the world »
You feel it yourself. Only a short time ago you sent to the
White peoples, through an American press bureau, a statement,
published even in the Journal de Geneva, saying that you reject'
official Christianity in the name of the message of Jesus as you
understand it in his Sermon on the Mount. Since the memor-
able letter which Tolstoy sent to you in 1909, we Western peo-
ples recognize more and more our need of you, of your traditions,
of your nation. As I v/rote you pre\nously, we owe to you some
experiences decisive for the world’s future.
What more gladsome news than to learn from the mouth of
your o\vn friend that it is possible, not to say certain, that you
may come to Europe soon ? You will understand how much' I
am hoping to see you, in order that we may be able to discuss
thoroughly our respective points of \iew. In the meantime. I
shall continue to study your ideas as well as the important book
of Mr. Andrews, who is trying, for the first time, to make
V/estem nations imderstand how your religious point of view
dominates your ideas and your acts.
Young India, 2-5-1929
n
WAE AGAINST WAE
{By B, de Ligt)
Let me venture, for the moment, to explain to you how the
greater number of Western war-resisters conceive their attitude
towards their Governments, what impression your reply has
made, and how v/e fear, as its consequence, an eventual militari-
zation of India.
In the first place we all know that modem governments are
only functionaries of capitalism and imperialism. We likewise
all — including libertarians and anarchists — recognize that the
present governments from time to time, perhaps even as a rule,
do good more or less. But that can never be for us a sufficient
motive for collaborating unreservedly with them in all their
enterprises, I am supposing, for instance, that some one — or
some government - — does me a great service. Am I then obliged,
from the moral point of view, to come to his assistance even
when he acts badly, offends and kills, and forms schemes which
are in flagrant opposition to any religious or humanitarian con-
ceptions? No, quite the contrary. The more grateful I feel
towards him, the less can I collaborate with him in evil work.
Quite apart from my own conduct, is it not my duty to hold him
back as far as possible from wrong-doing ? In the anti-militarist
movement of the Netherlands, we have always said to ourselves :
Our first duty is to prevent the Dutch Government — that Gov-
ernment which is, besides, rather our enemy than our friend —
from committing the great crime of taking part in collective
murder. Moreover, if we do not oppose military measures on
the part of our Government, we ourselves shall be obliged to
take pEirt in acts unworthy of man, the Government compelling
us* even to attack and kill other men who are not our enemies,
but comrades in misfortune on the other side of the frontier,
ill-treated by their authorities who, like our own, afe serving
above all capitalist and imperialist interests whose defence by
421
422
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
violence is in conflict with the essential needs of all peoples.
Even if we suppose for an instant that foreign armies should
really be our enemies, well, also in this extreme case we would
like to defend ourselves in a different manner, in a manner
which would at any rate gain for us a moral victory. Doubtless
this mode of action might fail from a practical point of view, bnt
the other might fail also ; and the first alone assures the exist-
ence in the world of that which is truly humane. In short, we
wish to strengthen in ah countries the power of direct action
against war, in such a way that no Government would have the
courage to resort to war, that it would even be impossible for it
to do so for lack of men, arms and munitions.
During the world war, the greater number of the radical
conscientious objectors, English, American, Australian, Cma-
dian, Germm, Austrian, etc. were convinced that it was '^eir
duty, as good citizens, not to participate in the great crime.
Indeed, what better could they do from their point of view,,
than remain during that"^ senseless time beings truly conscious
of their humane ideal, representing the conscience of then
nations waging war without scruple ? What better could they do-
than put humanity before their inhuman fatherland, so as to gain,
over to this cause not only their compatriols but, in the long run,
their official enemies also ? Bomain Holland has expressed this
point of view when he says that no one has the right to betray
his conscience for love of his coimtrj^ his race or his nation. In
doing so, does one not betray in oneself that which is best in
one’s nation, in one’s race, in one’s coimtry ? We have always
been told that if Christ had acted in this sense, he would have
become the aUy of Judas, he would not have been crucified and
would have become the Messiah of those of his compatriots whe* .
did not wish to renoimce national defence. Tolstoy has told us „
several times that one should have the courage to risk the sacri-
fice of one’s country in favour of humanity and the universal
conscience.
You will understand therefore why your participation in
three wars of the British Empire against peoples, who v/ere not
even your enemies, is for us something very painful. For in
doing that you forsook humanity in favour of merciless and
unscrupulous imperialism. You accept, in principle, all the con-
sequences of those enterprises of violence : the death of 26,37(1
WAR AGAINST WAR
423
women and children in the concentration camps in South Africa,
the death and sufferings of hundreds' of thousands of little
children of the Central Pov/ers by the monstrous blockade, the
unemployment without end to -which the British working classes
are condemned, etc,, etc., all the horror and shame, physical and
moral, consequent upon the Great War. We are convinced that
you did not foresee such an ocean of misery and decadence. We
willingly believe you when you declare that you never wished
to act otherwise than in the sense of ahimsa. But we ask you
whether the v/orld-war has not shown sufficiently that if one
desires above all ahimsa for men, one must at once break with
any system of national defence based on %nolence.
Do not imagine that we refuse to defend our rights and
liberties. We wish, indeed, to defend them in the most sublime
manner, by remaining faithful to the noblest traditions of
secular Christianity and modem socialism. Even if we consi-
dered to be just the cause for which our nation would be fighting
in a supposed war, v/e -would only come to its aid in our own
fashion, because over and above our country, as well as for the
sake of that country, we would have to uphold universal
humanity.
These arguments hold good still more today when, as every-
one knows, the chief question is this : In what manner will
humanity free itself as quickly as possible from that unworthy
expedient, war, an expedient which is an unparalleled menace
for all, vanquished and -victors alike ? We must inevitably
raise international relations to a higher level, else hvunanity will
be lacerated to such an extent, physically, morally and intellec-
tually, that it will perhaps never recover.
Now, just when the courageous women of the American
section of the International Women’s League for Peace and
Liberty are asserting -with reason that all war is today civil war,
because of the economic and intellectual interdependence of all
nations, just when Western nations, after a frightful experience,
are beginning to recognize the meaning of your mission and the
practical character of the methods of passive resistance, the
efficacy of which is proved by your Asiatic peoples, you write
that it is possible that, once India is liberated, you might vote
for the military training of the Indian people. This declaration
coincides with the publication of the Nehru plan, according to
424
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
which India not only demands Home Rule, but also asky to be
allowed to assure her own national defence. The articles pub-
lished in Foi*eign Ajfairs of April 1928 by Sir Sivaswami Aiyar,
conversations I have had with Swami Satya Deva, Dr, Datta,
and other compatriots of 'yours, have led me to fear that India
also may one day let herself be carried away by the fatal current
of armaments. It is for that reason that a few months ago, at
the International Conference against War, at Sonntagsberg, I
warned those present of the possibility of a militarization of the
Asiatic nations, favoured in a very imprudent manner by
Moscow and the III International, accompanied by the menace
of a similar militarization of Africa. Making almost desperate
efforts to rid the world of the monstrosity of modern war, and
just when our action is beginning to be taken seriously, we all
at once perceive on the Eastern horizon a new military danger
which serves as a pretext to our militarists to say: ‘‘But we
must arm in order to be able to defend ourselves against the
awakening East Thus, the vicious circle, on the point of being
broken, seems to be closing mercilessly.
You know Afghanistan is becoming militarized. Chiang
Kai-Shek has already declared that China will have, in about 15
years, a fleet of war and a powerful army. A Chinese friend,
formerly an enemy of all war, whom I saw again in Europe a
few months ago, assured me that not only is militarism in China
— until now totally imknown — growing steadily, but that the
world is threatened by something unheard of in history, a
Chinese imperialism ! He, who had formerly awakened in me a
love for the great anti-war traditions of his country and a pro-
found sympathy for the pacifism of its immortal sages, acknow-
ledged that he ;too had broken with his anti-militarist past. He
spoke almost like you, Gandhi, who now say essentially what
has always been preached by the clergy of the West : “ We are
for love and against all violence, in which personally we shall
never participate. But if it is necessary, we shall support mili-
tary training and national defence, since nations ought to be
able to defend their rights, to gain their liberty, to be them-
selves, whilst the masses have not the spiritual strength of a
'Jesus, a St. Paul or a Francois d’Assisi.” ^
Perhaps in bygone days this conception had some meaning.
But today ? The Japanese professor, Inazo Nitobe who under-
WAR AGAINST WAI^
425
stands and loves so intensely the heroic tradition of the hushido
of his warlike country, writes in his book on the Soul of Japan,
in which he recognizes in such an admirable manner the relative
right of the fighting instinct which slumbers in each individual :
“ If one is to believe history, the State, built up on warlike
virtues — whether it be a city like Sparta or an empire like
_ Rome — will never be able to. build upon earth ‘ a durable city ’
Life has widened out extraordinarily in the present era.
Missions nobler and greater than that of armies are today solicit-
ing our attention. Men have become more than subjects, being
raised to the state of citizens ; what am I saying ? They are more
than citizens, they are men The history of the world con-
firms the prophecy that the meek shall inherit the earth.” And
he seeks sublime forces for a nobler fight in the most profound
traditions of Christianity, of Buddhism, of Chinese philosophy,
and in the religious and moral traditions of his own country.
Thus expresses himself a man, in no wise a revolutionary, who,
in our opinion, has too much confidence in present-day political
methods. But he is right in principle.
It is necessary, in fact, finally to break with this system of
scientific ferocity which characterizes modern war, as much
from the practical as from the moral point of view. We are,
therefore, puzzled and uneasy on hearing you declare yourself
ready eventually to vote for the military training of the Indians,
you who seemed to us the appointed missionary to awaken such -
moral forces Jji your compatriots that they would have less_ and
less need of means of defence as barbarous as hypercivilized.
We wonder whether you,,Gandhi, always so distrustful with
regard to the industrialism of the West, are not, in fact, now
inclined to accept, along with a military training for 3'’Our people,
the most pernicious consequence of this industrialism, the new
war. The Nehru Committee, has it not already proposed an
army, a naval fleet and an air fleet for India ? ‘That is to say, by
5'-our last declaration you encourage the introduction into your
country of industrialized war, of war industries, of chemical,
electro-technical and even bacteriological war. Once launched
upon this path, there is no stopping. It is a question of all or ,
nothing.
Why not keep to the means the most efficacious for Orien-
tals, that is passive resistance, boycott and general strikes ?
426
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
\
Even if these means fail, their consequence will never be serious
as those of modern war. For if a modern war were successful^
it would smite fatally the masses of the people in the conquering
States as in the conquered. The militarist system is no longer a
means of defence worthy of confidence. But confidence in the
deepest forces of man himself is an inexhaustible source of
energy which is proving itself more and more efficacious in
enabling one to stand one’s ground, as a man, a nation or a race.
And if this energy is not yet sufficiently developed, what better
can one do than arouse and strengthen it everywhere ?
I am profoundly, sorry to feel myself again obliged to write
you a letter concerning the question of war. I imderstand how
much your time and your energy are taken up with the work
which you devote to the education of your people. But you have
also become a world leader. The most bigoted nationalists, the
Bolshevists, the Fascists even, are already using your reply to
my letter against those in all countries who frankly object to
the so-called national defence. You are at ‘the same time sowing
a pernicious hesitation in the hearts of thousands of 'men and
women, at a moment when a single affirmative word on your
part might perhaps have gained them over definitely to our
cause.
It is of the greatest importance that, for the time being, we
should be able to count upon you for our, war against war. But
that, however, is not enough. The day you would vote for the
miliary training of your compatriots, you would be setting your-
self against those Indians who are in agreement with us who,
in the spirit of Garrison, of Ballou, of Keir Hardie and of
Tolstoy, according to the ethics of true Christianity and the
methods of truly modem socialism, disapprove of all national
defence and condemn all military ‘ preparation, against those
who are endeavouring to relieve humanity of a burden under
which it is in danger of succumbing.
In Die Evvporung Asiens Colin Kosz tells us how you fear,
from the humanitarian point of view, the threatening militariza-/
tion of China. I share your anxiety, as is shown by my state-
ment on China in Gewalt und Gewaltlosigkeit, the German
manual of the W. R. I. Can you not also share our anxiety
regarding an eventual militarization of China and of India, of
Asia and of Africa ? The consequences of such militarization
WAR ^GAINST WAR,
4i’i1
would be a world-madness of war, a universal return to -bar-
barism. Help us to shatter the vicious circle that holds the
world in thrall rather than fortify it to the detriment of your
own people and all the other peoples of the globe.
It is particularly in the name of Tolstoy, the centenary of
whose birth we have commemorated this year, that I appeal to
you to meditate on this question, in the name of Tolstoy who
wrote in 1906 to Kou Hou Ivling :
“ Whilst European nations have long ago chosen the decep-
tive' path in which liberation from human violence is extra-
ordinarily difficult, the Oriental nations have only arrived at
the crossroads.”
Your Asiatic nations can still choose the right road. Seeing
the misery of the Western peoples, the Oriental peoples should,
according to Tolstoy, renounce any attempt to free themselves
by political means and endeavour to remain faithful to the only
true law which renders impossible the submission of man to
violence. ^
You have not published my former letter in Young India,
I should be very grateful to you, if you would kindly publish
this one, as I, on my side, publish what you write to me in the
European and American press. For, in appealing to you, I
appeal to those who are with you and who will be with us, I
hope,- in hatred of war and love of humanity,
I would like those who are interested in the question of the
liberation of classes and races to realize that war, as a means of
resistance, is morally wrong and practically harmful, and that
our conscience and our reasoning condemn it as well as any form
of preparation, including military training.
Always ready to collaborate with you against war and for
the liberation of oppressed races and classes, and assuring you of
my profound sympathy.
Young India, 9-5-1929
ni
^ CAT AND MOUSED
Most Venerated Gandhi,
I agree entirely with you in recognizing that indeed the
inhiiman rivalry, which goes on throughout the whole earth to
exploit all the so-called inferior races, is one of the principal
eauses of modern war. This rivalry was even one of the essen-
tial causes of the world war. Moreover, those other two wars
“also, on the occasion of which we exchanged vie%vs, presented
an imperialist character. But alas ! the explanation of your
participation in those wars convinces me less and less. .
In any case, the fact that you declare yourself unable “in
any conceivable circumstance ” to participate in British wars, is
a real step forward. As I have already noted, you and the
millions who are with you could become (unless some quite un-
foreseen circumstances should arise) a factor for world peace,
of the highest importance.
But on the other hand, your assertion, almost diplomatic,
•that you will never take part, in no matter what “ war of exploit-
ation ” entered upon by an India eventually free, does not seem
to o2er sufficient security for the future. This assertion, does it
perhaps proceed from the fact that you were thinking of an India
which, as a dominion, would be obliged in certain circumstances
to take part in krmed measures of the Empire and in eventual
.sanctions of the League of Nations ? .
I repeat, my objections do not concern your relative appre-
ciation in regard to the violent struggle for freedom. But they
are aimed solely at the fact that you, who personally uphold a
more sublime form of struggle and who from several points of
view have carried out this struggle within the frontiers of the
British Empire, are at the same time morally encouraging the
militarization of your own country rather than opposing it, and
that at a time when any national armament begins to be a
menace for the whole of humanity. My objections, likewise, are
'directed against your collaboration in the preparation of a
national Indian State, organized on the same lines as the Western
428
‘CAT AND MOUSE’
429 '
States, in which, according to the supplementary report of the
enlarged Nehru Committee, published in the Indian Forward
of the ^Ist December 1928, there would function a Committee of
Defence formed, by the Prime Minister, the Minister of Defence,
the Minister of Foreign -Affairs, the Commander-in-Chief of the
Army, the Commander of the Air Forces, the Commander of the
Naval Forces and the Chief of the General Staff, whilst the Head
of the Government, in the event of India being attacked, or if
he should consider it as the victim of an aggression, will have
the right to raise what money he will esteem necessary for the
security of India or of any part of it.*
It seems to us, that in acting in quite a different manner from
Tolstoy, you put too much confidence in measures of boiirgeois
policy, and that you participate in the organization of a form
of government which not only will oppress the great masses of
*your people, but at the same time might become a danger for
the evolution of world history. That status of dominion, to the
realization of which you are today devoting all your strength,
is a political institution which will inevitably be used against
the great masses of the population of your o^vn country by the
dominant Indian classes, which will become more and more
allied with the dorhinant foreign classes. And the military, aero- ,
chemical and naval measures, for which your coimtry is going
also to decide, risk promoting still further the world competition
in armaments.
The statements made in the Frankfort Conference on
Modern War Methods and the Protection of Civil Populations
have just been published. More clearly than ever they show
that all technique and science are today being directed in the
first place towards .collective destruction and murder. This
Conference has shown that war has become a method of struggle
operating in such' a fatal manner, from the moral as well as
from the practical point of view, that it must be abolished, not
only for' national defence but also for the realization of the
social revolution. Not to enlarge fm'ther on this point, I beg
* Committee ot Defence, Minister of Defence; tlien in paragraph 77 : in the
event of foreign aggression on India or upon his being satisfied that there is a rea*
sonahlc apprehension of such aggression. As one can see, all that is borrowed from
Western States, where, in order to tranquillize public opinion, one is beginning
today to speak of “Ministry of Defcnce’% and where one declares the intention of
only defending oneself against aggression or against that which is considered as
aggression.
430
NON-VIOIiENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
you to refer to the speech of Arthur Muller-Lehning and to my
own, delivered at the World Congress against Imperialism in
Frankfort. We have now reached a decisive moment in history
when the question is to find in all continents powerful groups
of men and women who can declare conscientiously : ‘‘ As for
us, we refuse, in all cases, to prepare or to employ any engines
of war, and we seek to reduce more and more their preparation /
and their employment. Strictly speaking, we prefer even to
lose four national independence — independence which, more-
over, is today becoming more, and more, fictitious — rather than
maintain, it by such means.”
Could national independence become a fiction ? It might
indeed, as we are traversing an epoch of growing international
interdependence. As I have stated elsewhere, national units
are no longer in a position to dispose of themselves in a really
free fashion from the political and' economic point of view,*
neither within the boundaries of Soviet Russia which contains
so many different peoples, nor outside those boundaries.. If
your India attains the Dominion Status, it will be; from several
points of view, allied to the British Empire. It will be sub-
jected, as part of that Empire, and also as a member of the
League of Nations, to all sorts of obligations which it will not
be able to escape, however little they may interest India directly.
As soon as ypur country begins to arm, it becomes immediately
dependent^ upon international capital for mimitions, and upon
the great foreign banks; as soon as it begins to develop its
industry, your ruling class immediately calls upon financial
powers outside the country, which inevitably will place heavy
chains about the neck of your own people. Modern capitalism,
which today embraces almost the whole earth, is tending
unremittingly towards a universal dictatorship. This can only
be weakened and eventually crushed, if we create against it a
imited international front, formed of all races and all peoples,
which would fight, not for out-of-date nationalist conceptions,
but for the realization of a universal and supemational commu-
nity. Today all nationalism, considered purely as such, is old-
fashioned, not only from the historical but likewise from the
moral point of view, although from the ideological point of
view it still flourishes and works everywhere. In fact national
war is becoming more and more transformed into a struggle of
‘CAT AND MOUSE’
431
classes and races, embracing the whole earth. It is for us now
to fight in the most humane and the most universal manner for
our own liberation and for that of all classes and of all oppressed
races.
It seems, however, that you, venerated Gandhi, have first
of all concentrated your attention in too one-sided a manner
upon India instead of taking into consideration, in the first
place, the whole of humahity of which, nevertheless, your
people also form part, and that with an impatience only. too
comprehensible you sought, as principal object, to attain
‘ tangible results’. It is this attitude which risks limiting your
horizon and causing your tactics to swerve from their universal
tendency. Of course we sympathize with you in your impatience,
from several points of view, because we ourselves are fighting
against our own Governments for the liberation of the coloured
races. Since even we of the Occident cannot bear the injustice
endured by the coloured peoples, how much more must it be
unbearable to you, son of an oppressed Oriental nation ? But
when your impatience, so noble in itself, leads you to make use
of methods which have a most dangerous tendency, we must
•set oiirselves against it. And when, moreover, you even try to
make it believed that India has hitherto been “ helplessly driven
into Britain’s wars of exploitation”, in spite of herself, we can
■only reply ; No. Things have not happened thus, for you
^ yourself are one of those' who have consciously induced India
to participate in such wars, and because of that you also must
bear the full responsibility for it.
On your side, you state that those who set themselves against
Western wars pay, nevertheless, taxes which are used by the
State for war and the oppression of the coloured peoples. That
is quite true. In fact our anti-militarist struggle also is as yet
only something very relative, and it must go on extending. But
' in any case, we have fixed clear and inflexible bounds : we
refuse absolutely all direct personal participation in war and
in its social and moral preparation. But several of us employ
•still other means of fighting against it, I refer, for instance,
to the Dutch movement of the Manifesto refusing direct and
indirect military service, which cost several of its signatories,
both men and women, the loss of their social position and created
for others all sorts of difficulties ; to the Ponsonby Action, begun
432
NON-WOIxENCE IN PEACE AND WAR '
in England and spreading widely throughout Germany — and
there are still others. Moreover, a few of us have- already
decided individually to refuse to pay any taxes, whilst the
organization of which I am a member has already several times
been the propagandist of collective refusal of taxation. But
whereas refusal, even on a very restricted scale, to do military
service has been morally and socially efficacious, the refusal to
pay taxes by a restricted number of citizens only has so far had
very little result, as the authorities, in confiscating property
and inflicting fines, take ppssession of sums much larger than
a direct payment of taxes would have brought them.' From
this point of view, your compatriots have already given some
impressive examples of collective refusal, although they also
were not able to avoid the regular exactions of the Government.
However it may be, in the struggle against the oppression
of the coloured races, we are at one with you. I even belong
to an organization which has participated in this struggle
already since the beginning of this century (1904). We are en-
deavoiuing to do away as soon as possible with the relation of
“ cat and mouse ” existing between the different races of huma-
nity without, however, wishing to replace them by the relations
of cat and dog. That is why we not only object to violent ten-
dencies amongst our own people and race, but we also exhort
other peoples and races, who are not defenceless mice but moral
beings, not to let themselves be seduced by violence, but to^
adopt those higher forms of combat which, for centuries past,
have befen recommended on moral grounds by the most sublime
representatives of humanity, and the practical significance of
which you yoiuself in pa3rticular have taught us.
As for your expectation of a Great Britain reborn from a
moral point of view, it seems to me that you would favour this
regeneration more by siding with the most radical of the British
war resisters, instead of hoping for salvation from a so-called
socialist Government which is inevitably condemned to play' a
fatal political role in the international imperialistic develop-
ment. You will already have noticed how, imder Macdonald
likewise, the persecution of your compatriots who are fighting
for their rights and liberty continues. However amiable may
be the manner in which you speak to the British rulers and
however benevolent may perhaps be the tone of those who
■ NON-VIOLENCE THE ONLY WAY
433
answer you, they will, nevertheless, only try to satisfy your
people by an apparent and fictitious solution.
I have esteemed you too highly, venerated Gandhi, to con-
tent' myself with merely taking note of your “imconscious
weakness ” as you so Mndly propose that I should do, but what
I tried up to now to do is to reply to your arguments by other
arguments. It is in the desire that you may be able to revise
your attitude in the past and the present that I have written to
you, and that I do so again today. The fife of the world has
become such a imity, that national interests cannot be really
imderstood nor served except from the point of view of the
tmiversal interests of all humanity. This, moreover, is the
summing up of everything that I have laid before you.
Onex, Geneva, 5, XII, 1929
Young India, 30-1-1930
IV
NON-VIOLENCE THE ONLY WAY
(By Richard B. Gregg)
£I share with the reader the following letter from Mr. Gregg, -
the author of several books on kfiadi and non-violence. He is
an industrious and accurate student of world events. The rea-
der may know that Mr. Gregg was in India long enough to
study things Indian. M. K. G.l
Those two articles of yours in Harijan on the Czechoslovak
situation and threatened war in Europe * have my entire agree-
ment and approval. I am sorry that there are still members of
the Working Committee who think that freedom of any group
or nation could be won by bargaining to permit violence. Can
they not see that the hour when the British Empire goes to
war, fascism becomes established in- every comer of it by
virtue of the necessities of modem totalitarian war, and that
dictatorship is never voluntarily abandoned, no matter what the
promises may he at the start ? In -view of the myriad of violat-
ed promises dating from the beginning of the World War, how
* Chapters CO and 61 in this book.
N. V.— 23
434
NON-VIOLEN-CB IN PEACE AND WAR
can >they believe that a promise glibly given by a system in
danger of its life can possibly be fulfilled when its fulfilment
means suicide ? The kind of change of heart you seek by
satyagralm could hardly take place in such an atmosphere of
fear and hatred,
✓
The spectacle of what is happening in Europe does not in
the least upset my faith in non-violence. All that has happened
in the past twenty years proves up to the hilt that violence does
not win anything worth while, and that whatever it creates is
most unstable. Who now has won the World War — the Allies
cr Germany ? Who believes that the conditions now being
established in Germany and the rest of Central Europe by
means of violence will be permanent ? Nor can Japan create
stable conditions in China by her present tactics.
Modern war is very different from even that of 1914-18.
The use of airplane bombing with high explosives, incendiary
and poison gas, plus anti-aircraft guns, means that the bombers
have to fly so high that they cannot aim accurately. Hence,
modern war is not only vastly more destructive, it is also vastly
more indiscriminate in its attack. In former wars the women,
children and aged were mostly unharmed and at home, and.
able to carry on most of the habits of normal life. Now they
, are even more defenceless than the soldiers. There are no
longer any front line trenches. Everyone is, in effect, in the
trenches. A wise general always kept certain troops in reserve,
and never threw' them all into battle. But modern militarists
are compelled to throw the entire nation into danger of destruc-
tion. There may be no reserve to carry on and re-establish
civilization after a modern war, ^ ^
A modern thermite bomb cannot be quenched by water.
It bums at a temperature of about 2,000 degrees and melts its
way through steel beams and eight inches of solid concrete
cement. Not even Spain has shown the full horrors of modern
war. Incendiary bombs have been used there only twice ; pro-
bably as an experiment, by the Germans, and gas bombs not at
all. The Germans developed a new and terrible form of attack
from the air, in which the planes rose to a great height of about
20,000 feet where they were invisible from the ground ; and at
a distance of about 75 miles from the city they were aiming at,
they shut off their engines, thus becoming entii^ely silent and
NON-VIOLENCE THE ONLY WAY
485
incapable of detection by even the most delicate sound recorders.
They coasted that 75 miles and dropped high explosive bombs
upon the city of Barcelona without the slightest warning. I
have seen photographs of the results. Defensive measxires
against that form of attack are utterly futile. Modem war is
not men fighting against men ; it is men, women and children
exposed to the limitless violence of machines and chemicals.
To pretend to fight that is not bravery but utter folly. I do not
mean to pile on the horrors. I mean to point out that satya-
graha is the only weapon left. Science and machinery have
really ended militarism. Some stupid people may not yet see
it and may try another European war. It will only result in
destruction such that only the humble dark-skinned races and
nations will be left to carry on the torch of human culture.
Nothing worth while can be defended or maintained or promoted
by modem war.
I pray that you may be able to keep India out of entering
any war whatsoever. In order possibly to help you with some
'unconvinced friends, I am sending you a little book by a dis-
tinguished British thinker, Bertrand Russell. It is called
Which Way to Peace ? In it he first sets forth the nattire of
modem war, mostly by quotations from the experts. Then he
examines in turn each of the proposed ways out — collective
security, isolationism, alliances, the policy of expedients, wars
of principle — that is, wars for democracy, to end war, to end
fascism, to promote any great political principle. His analysis
is clear and cogent. Against his wiU he was driven to the
conclusion that complete pacifism is the only possible practical
policy. He does not develop the possibilities of satyagraha at
all, just leaves the matter there. And he is not a religious man
at all, and is far more pessimistic about human nature than you
or I. I commend it to you as a brilliant and thorough piece of
analysis, and likely to be helpful to you, if you are going to dis-
cuss this topic further. ^
I have also read and agree with ymur article ‘What Are
Basic Assumptions?’ in Harijan of October 22. Let me tell you
how modem scientific researches have supplied knowledge
which backs up the faith of a satyagrahi.
A great English investigator named G. Elliott Smith and his
followers and collaborators have deeply studied the evolution
436
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
\
of the human brain and nervous system, and compared it
diligently with the corresponding evolution of the nervous
system of animals. It has been proved beyond doubt that man
is the only animal in whom the nerves of sensation do not end
in the lower nerve centres along the spine, nor in the hinder
portion of the brain called the cerebellum which controls all
involuntary movements, nor even in a further advanced part of
the brain called the corpus striatum, but go on through and
past these to cerebrum, the front part of the brain where we do
our thinking. Also, in connection with this fact, discriminatory
action, as distinguished from involuntary instinctive move-
ments, is initiated also in the cerebrum, the part where we do-
our thinking. This second fact is proved not only by the ana-
tomy of the nerves, but also by the fact that the human baby^
as distinguished from the young of most animals, cannot walk
at birth but has to watch its parents and elders until it acquires
an intellectual pattern of walking. After we learn how to walk
we do not delegate that activity to our lower nerve centres. It
still continues an activity of the cerebrum, even though habit
makes its control unconscious most of the time. This is proved
by the fact that when that part of the cerebrum is organically
and physically injured by an accident to the head or by dege-
nerative disease there, then such a person can no longer walk,^
even though all the rest of his brain and nervous system is
intact.
From this I deduce the conclusion that, by his very ana-
tomy, by the structure of his nervous system (in which all men
of all races and nations are alike), man is compelled to seek the
truth, to find what will work in his life here on earth with
other men, to learn all the subtle forces as well as the obvious
and readily observed forces that play upon and control our
total life. No dictator can change human anatomy. It means
of course that, since man is thus controlled by his thinking, if
he makes an intellectual error, it may cause appalling losses and
suffering. But it also means that, no matter what disasters may
come upon him, man has to pick himself up and search on again
for a more complete and accurate vision of the truth. Man’s
spiritual nature and his emotional nature are also a part of the
truth. Nazis and Fascists have the same nervous systems as
democrats or communists. To me this gives a further strong
NON-VIOLENCE THE ONLY WAY
437
basis for ^optimism, and for faith in satyagraha. I submitted
this deduction of mine to a distinguished physician whd'is in
dose touch with all the modern research in this and other
medical fields, and he said he thought my conclusion was right,
although he preferred to state it in terms of a very high degree
of probability, just as cautious scientists are now stating the
law of gravity only as a very high degree of probability.
By way of historical examples of the satyagrahVs faith that
non-violence will be effective even against people trained in
modern totalitarian ideas, it is interesting to know that the
few Quakers in Germany have been interfered with less than
any other religious group, apparently because the German
people remember still with gratitude the relief work of the
Quakers towards the Germans during the starvation days of
the Allied blockade after the war. Also I have read in the
actual history of a prisoner in a Nazi prison, who later escaped,
that a great service rendered by one of the prisoners to the
Storm Trooper guards of the prison resulted later in their
secretly saving his life when he was being tortured by the
officers in charge of the prison.
While it has not yet been tested for a whole nation, I believe
that disciplined satyagraha by a considerable number of people
in a nation can win its freedom, and with that method can go
on to build better civilization for mankind to emulate and
thereby save the world.
It seems to me that the Western nations are mistaken in
condemning Germany with such moral indignation, for Ger-
many’s deeds now are the natiual result of the way the Allies
treated Germany during and after the war, by such methods as
the nine months’ naval blockade of Germany, which
caused the death by starvation of nearly a million Ger-
man children and women, and similar starvation in
Austria, and the impossible financial indemnities levied
as pretended punishment on Germany, and all the self-
righteous accusations that Germany alone caused the
war, and the humiliations of many other sorts forced upon
her and her 'headers. It has created on Germany a form of
morbid feelings and thinking allied to insanity. It is futile as
well as wrong to condemn an insane person for his acts, espe-
cially if I have caused his insanity. A Chinese proverb says
that a wise person uses other persons as his mirror. . Germany
438
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
is the mirror held tip to the Allies, in which; after a lapse of
time, ‘they are seeing the reflection of the evils within them-
selves, They recoil with horror, but their horror, if it were
understood, would be directed at their own disharmonies and
shortcomings.
To jump to Another aspect of the European situation, a
number of keen observers, both in America and at Geneva, have
stated, from reading the British White Paper and comparing it
with Lord Runciman’s activities and other straws in the hews,
that they believe that two weeks before Hitler’s Nuremburg
speech Runciman had told Sudeten German leaders that he was
going to recommend to Chamberlain that Czechoslovakia should
be dismembered, that this was transmitted to Hitler, who then
knew that Chamberlain was tied to 'what Runciman would
advise, so that Hitler knew that he could threaten war and
compel Chamberlain to yield, Willhout all the supporting evi-
dence, which I do not have space here to add, that may seem
like an unbelievable state of affairs. I can say assuredly, how-
ever, that the great majority of American opinion is that the
British Tory Party believes ' that, if Hitler’s prestige were
severely shaken or he were defeated in a war, Germany would
have a revolution and become Commxmist, and that Communism
would hurt the British ruling class more than Nazism or
Fascism. Therefore Chamberlain was ready to do anything to
avoid war. That is, that the Tory party has put its class interests'
above its imperial interests, and has compelled France to follow
suit. I look for a long period of black reaction in England and
France:
To put the matter in another form, it seems to me probable
that the modern methods and weapons of war now threaten
the safety of the ruling classes as much as that of the masses,
both directly because of the indiscriminateness of modern
weapons, and indirectly because of the much greater danger of
revolution and destruction of civilization by war. The weapons
will be kept as a means to terrify the masses ( an English girl,
who was in London at the time of the crisis, told me that the
panic in the East End of London because of fear of air raids
was exceedingly great, though of course no mention was allow-
ed to be made in the papers). The masses, if terrified, can be
made to adopt any sort of repression under the guise of protec-
/
/
NON-VIOLENCE THE ONLY WAY 439
f
tion against air raids. If the weapons are used, they will be
turned not against another nation but against the working class.
Capitalism is in its period of decline and desperate. As long as
violence is threatened, the holders of power will do anything
to keep their position of relative control, even though it means
a general impoverishment in which they too share. Only by
means of full-fledged satyagraha can they be altered, I believe.
Well, you can see that I do not have much hope for We'stem
civilisation. Your beliefs are going to be proved true much
faster than anyone conceived likely. Your programme of
satyagraha, khadi, Harijan reform, Hindu-Muslim unity, village
industries, and revised education through handicraft, is not
only absolutely sound, it is the hope of India and the hope of
B the world. For there is coming a great economic breakdown in
the West which will make khadi as much needed there as it is
in India.
]3ecause of these beliefs I want to write this additional book
on which I am now working, in an attempt to develop sugges-
tions for methods of training in non-violence better than my
pamphlet, answering criticisms and doubts of the programme,
integrating the philosophy and the methods, and showing the
importance of manual work. It cannot cover it all, but, as in
the other instance, I am trying to put it all in Western termino-
logy and concepts. In the disruption of former modes of senti-
ment and action, I believe there is very great need for a firm
new philosophy of a better way of social living and the way
shown how to bring it about. Access to Western libraries is
necessary for this writing. I hope that such a book could be
useful in India as well as in the West,
Perhaps I am mistaken, perhaps I am deceiving myseM,
but anyhow for that purpose I am staying on here, taking a risk
of possible moral harm to myself, and a risk that war may
break out and prevent mj^ getting this written or published. If
I am mistaken, I will pay for it in my next and succeeding
incarnations.
, I do intend to come again to India to see if I can help there.
I cannot disengage myself from India, nor do I want to. Believ-
ing as I do that your movement is the hope of the entire world,
I feel that as soon as I can get this book done I can thereafter
help even my own country best by trying to help strengthen
440
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
the movement in India. Just how soon I can get away I cannot
tell. I want to see you and be with you again. Please forgive
me that I do not start instantly. I am trying to use my abilities
for you in the best way I can see. So much trouble and suffer-
ing come from people being unable to think clearly on these
problems. I am trying to clarify thought.
I have a number of ideas as to how possibly I might be of
aid after I get there, but they would all be subject to the needs
as they actually are at that time. - Even if I could not help much,
I would like to be there.
Harijan, 24-12-1938
V
WE ARE TREATED. AS SUBHUMANS—
WE'ARE ASKED TO BE SUPERHUMAN
[The following is an abridgement of the article by Mr. Hayem
Greenburg from the Jewish Frontier referred to by G^ndhiji in
his article “The Jewish Question” — Chapter 77, page 205, in
this book.]
In his article concerning the Jewish question, a statement
for which certain elements in Jewry have long waited with
impatience, the spiritual leader of Young India directs against
us two important accusations. He blames us for not exhibiting
the heroism of militant pacifism in those lands where Jews are
persecuted, and especially in Germany. On the other hand he
accuses us of following an aggressively nationalist — almost
imperialist' — policy in Palestine and of a desire to deprive
the Arabs of their fatherland.
Gandhi’s first accusation is quite natural and is in complete
harmony with his entire world outlook. His temperament does
not tolerate passivity and his ethical-religious convictions dic-
tate to him the duty of heroic and active resistance according
to the Indian principle of “ Satyagraha
The motivating idea of “ Satyagraha ” is n9t, as some claim,
a practical strategy which Gandhi “ made to order ” to meet the
concrete demands of the Indian situation. Long ago he advocat-
ed it as a universal ideal which could be applied by all the
oppressed and injured everywhere and independent of the
WE ARE TREATED AS SUBHUMANS
441
specific historical situation. Personally I feel that the indivi-
dual and group struggles according to the plan of “Satyagraha ”
— aside from its moral-religious implications — have proved
to be practical and effective. The truth of the “Satyagraha”
teaching — which in another form has been expressed by Jesus
and other Jewish teachers many generations ago — is in my
eyes as self-evident as a mathematical axiom. But I must admit
to myself that in order to apply Gandhi’s method of struggle it
is necessary to accept it not only on a purely intellectual plane ;
it is also imperative that it be assimilated emotionally, that it
should be believed in with all the force of one’s being. Such
faith the Jews of Germany do not possess. Faith in the principle
of “Satyagraha” is a matter of special predisposition which,
for numerous reasons, the German Jews have not developed.
The civilization in which German Jews have lived for so many
generations, and to the creation of which they have so energe-
tically and ably contributed, has not prepared them for the
“ pathos ” of “ Satyagraha ”. As a result they are now defence-
less. The accepted defence methods of the European-American
world cannot be applied by the German Jews. They cannot
resort to passive resistance because they lack the heroism, the
faith and the g>ecific imaginative powers which alone can sti-
mulate such heroism.' When Gandhi accuses German Jews of
lacking that mentality which, in his estimation, is the only
truly heroic mentality, I am ready to concur with him, but with
one reservation which he also must accept — that this accusa-
tion should also be levelled against the millions of non-Jewish
Germans who wear the yoke of the Hitler regime with impo-
tent hatred and show no more affinity for “ Satyagraha ” methods
than do the Jews ; against the millions of Italians who for years
have breathed the contaminated air of their own tyranny ;
against the tens of millions of Russians who have exhausted
their strength in civil war and do not find their way to the
Gandhi method of resisting the red despotism ; against hundreds
of millions of Chinese who by their military resistance aid the
Japanese aggressors to ravage their coimtry instead of follow-
ing the path of non-co-operation.
It is true that one may demand, as Gandhi does, that Jews,
and particularly the Jews of Germany, should be the “pioneers ”
of new forms of social struggle in the Western world and should
442
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
be the first to embrace the practice of “ Satyagraha Gandhi
wishes that we should set an example to the non-Jewish Ger-
mans, that we should point the way to a spiritual crusade against
their wicked Government. He may have a sound reason for
believing that the incomparable suffering and degradation to
which German Jews are subjected “ compels ” them to act more
heroically and to be more ‘‘ adventurous spiritually than their
neighbours. I do not question the idea implicit in Gandhi’s
demand that there is a mutual relationship between the inten-
sity of suffering and the intensity of the moral reaction to
suffering. But there is reason to assiime that when suffering
and insults transgress certain boimds it is quite natural that
the reaction should be a feeling of futility and despair instead
of that heroism which Gandhi suggests. This is especially true
when the group concerned is historically and psychologically
not prepared for such a catastrophe and therefore looks upon it
as a sudden and unexpected occurrence. The prophet of Young
India has in this instance exhibited an unusual lack of psycho-
logical imderstanding.
Gandhi should also have understood that it is far less simple
to preach ^‘Satyagraha” to German Jews than it is to Indian
masses, even to the lowest caste of “untouchables”. We all
know the evils of English rule and administration in India. But
one should be wary of drav/ing comparisons between the situa-
tion of the Indian masses today, or even twenty years ago, and^
the position of the German Jews today. ‘
« 4 : «
A Jewish Gandhi in Germany, should one arise, could
“function” for about five minutes — until the first Gestapo
agent would lead him, not to a concentration camp, but directly
to the guillotine.
If Gandhi demands heroism from the Indians, he demands
of the German Jews a measure of super-heroism imexampled in
historj^ Gandhi’s comparison between the situation of the
Indians and that of the German Jews contains an element of
unfairness which crept in against his will and against his
intentions.
But if Gandhi demands that we practise super-heroism in
Germany, he requests that in Palestine we should renounce the
WE ABE TREATED AS SUBHUMANS
443
most elementary rights which every people may and should
claim. When he asks why we do not “ like the other peoples
of the earth ” make our home in the land where we were born
and where we earn our livelihood, he indicates that he has not
pondered the unusual drama of the paradoxical Jewish history.
Jews have been dispersed for many generations, and it could
not be an accident that after sojourning in so many lands and
with so many peoples they have not become so rooted in those
countries that these should cease being “stepmother lands”.
« *
But Gandhi refuses to recognize our right to a distinct
territorial settlement, a right which is enjoyed, almost’ without
exception, by all the peoples of the world. Were it not so, he
would see the Palestine ’problem in an altogether different
political and moral light. For when he says that “it would be
a crime against humanity to reduce the proud Arabs so that
Palestine can be restored to the Jews partly or wholly as their
National Homeland,” he forgets that, if national honoiur is at
stake (this is the burden of his statement, and he knows full
well that one may not repeat the discredited allegations of eco-
nomic or cultural harm that Jews supposedly caused to Arabs),
he should also have thought of Jewish honour. Either it is dis-
honourable to be a minority in a country or jt is merely a
question of fictitious prestige for which he can have no sym-
pathy. If only pseudo-honour is involved, why should he be
concerned lest the “proud Arabs ” be deprived of the enjoyment
of an inflated pride ? But if real national honour is at stake,
why should the Arabs enjoy it throughout the length and
breadth of the Arabian peninsula, Iraq, Lebanon, Trans- Jordan,
and Egypt (an ar.ea almost as large as the Eurof)ean continent),
' While the Jews should be deprived of this honour, even in an
area which occupies about one per cent of the above-mentioned
land ; an area to which they have historical claims and the na-
tural right they acquired during two generations of diligent
work, initiative, heroism and suffering ?
From a purely legalistic point of view, it may be possible
to agree with him that “the mandates have no, sanction but
that of the last war.” This does not mean, however, that the
basic idea of the mandates, and the mandatory system as it has
been practised during the past twenty years, was born from
444
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
the war. The idea underlying the mandate which, according
to the constitution of the League of Nations, should be applied
in territories where the population is not ready for self-govern-
ment, or where local interests must be subordinated to more
important considerations of an international character, is poten-
tially of great humanitarian significance. It is a prelude to that
^‘civil society” of which Franklin wrote in the eighteenth cen-
tury ; it is a way to a more rational and just collective inter-
national control of the world^s wealth. I am not unaware of
the shortcomings with which the League of Nations is weighed
down nor of its sad fate during recent years which also brought
misfortime to all humanity. But whoever observed closely the
activities of the League in the administration of mandated
territories — naturally excluding those areas mandated to Japan,
a coimtry which cynically mocked League control even when
its representatives were still sitting at Geneva — must admit
that the mandatory system is a step forward when compared
with the uncontrolled colonial regimes of the past and the pre-
sent. The fact that a mandatory Government is responsible to
the Permanent Mandates Commission, in which the majority oi
the members represent governments possessing neither man-
dates nor colonial possessions, is in itself an advance in the
direction of internationalism and the htimanization of the world.
It is regrettable that Gandhi approached our problem with-
out that fundamental earnestness, and passionate search for
truth which are so characteristic of his usual treatment of pro-
blems. He therefore missed the deeper implications of the
Mandates system. He /therefore also failed to grasp the un-
equalled tragedy of Jewish existence. This is the reason why
he can justify the phenomenon of five Arab States demanding in
London the establishment of a sixth one on the eve of the fotmd-
ing of two other sovereign Arab governments in Syria and Le-
banon, while at the same time sanctioning the denial of refuge
to Jews in their old home.
This also explains his stand that Arabs must nowhere be
reduced to the status of a minority while tens of millions of
Russians, Poles, Czechs, Germans, Irish and Italians live in
dozens of countries as ethnic noinorities and while Jews live as
a persecuted minority on the entire globe.
With all my respect for the Mahatma (I doubt if there is
GANDHUI ABSOLVED
445
another living man who evokes within me such a moral aware-
ness of his loftiness) I cannot help feeling that in the present
instance he has betrayed his inner nature. 1 cannot avoid the
suspicion that, so far as the Palestine problem is concerned,
Gandhi allowed himself to be influenced by the anti-Zionist pro-
paganda being conducted among fanatic pan-Islamists. His
understandable and praiseworthy desire for a united front with
the Mohammedans apparently misguided and blinded bim to
significant realities and deprived him of that analytical clarity
which is a part of his moral being. Years ago he was, for the
same reason, misguided into supporting the agitation for the
re-establishment of the Khahfate, an institution that is at such
variance with his general views. Gandhi was wrong then; he
is also mistaken in the present instance and the soiurce of these
mistakes seems to be the same.
Harijan, 27-5-1939
VI
GANDHUI ABSOLVED
The following is the full text of the Working Committee’s
declaration of policy :
The Working Committee have been deeply moved by the
tragic events that have taken place in Europe in startling suc-
cession and in particular by the misfortunes that have befallen
the people of France. These events have already had far-reach-
ing consequences, and they are likely to be followed by other
happenings which will lead to novel situations and complex
problems. ^
Ever since the commencement of European war^ the Con-
gress has followed a policy which was based on its principles
and on the attitude of the British Government “towards the
demand that India should fimction as a free and independent
country. This policy was confirmed in the Ramgarh resolution.
The manner of the application of this policy will necessarily
depend on the situation which changes from day to day. Pro-
blems which were distant are now near at hand and may soon
demaSd solution. The problem of the achievement of national
freedom has now to be considered along with the allied one.
446
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
its maintenance and the defence of the country aga^st possible
external aggression and internal disorder.
The war in Europe, resulting from a desire for imperialist
domination over other peoples and countries and a suicidal race
in armaments, has led to human sorrow and misery on a scale
hitherto unknown. It has demonstrated the inefncacy of or-
ganized violence, on however vast a scale, for the defence of
national freedom and the liberties of peoples. It has shown
beyond a doubt that warfare cannot lead to peace and freedom ;
and the choice before the world is uttermost degradation and
destruction through warfare or the way of peace and non-vio-
lence on basis of freedom for all peoples. Mahatma Gandhi
has presented to the peoples of the world, crying for relief from
the crushing burden of war, a' weapon in the shape of organiz-
ed non-violence designed to take the place of war for the defence*
of a people’s rights and freedom against armed aggression. He
feels that at this critical phase in the history of man the Congress
should enforce this ideal by itself declaring that it does not
want that India should niaintain armed forces to defend her
freedom against external aggression or internal disorder.
While the Working Committee hold that the Congress must
continue to adhere strictly to the principle of non-violence in
their struggle for independence, the Committee cannot ignore
the present imperfections and, failings in this respect of the
human elements they have to deal with, and the possible dan-
gers in a period of transition and dynamic change, until the
Congress has acquired non*-violent control over the people in
adequate measure and the people have imbibed sufficiently the
lesson of organized non-violence. The Committee have deli-
berated over the problem that has thus arisen and have come
to the conclusion that they are unable to go the full length with
Gandhiji. * But they recognize 'that he should be free to pursue
his great ideal in his own way, and therefore absolve him from^
responsibility for the programme and activity which the Con-
gress has' to pursue under the conditions at present prevailing
in India and the world in regard to external aggression and in-
ternal disorder.
Many of the problems which the Working Committee have
considered in this connection are not of the present, though they
may be of the near future. The Committee wish to make it clear
t
GANDHUI ABSOLVED
44T
that the methods and basic policy of non-violence in the national
struggle for freedom continue with full force and are not affect-
ed in the least by the inability to extend it to the region of
national defence.
The War Committees that are being formed are definitely
aimed at increasing the war effort. In view of the Congress
policy, they cannot be supported, and Congressmen cannot par-
ticipate in them or contribute to war funds, nor can Congress-
men associate themselves, imder present political conditions,
with Government-controlled Civic Guards.
Congress committees should organize, wherever necessary,
people in villages and other areas for self-defence and in order
to maintain a sense of public security in their respective areas.
This should be done on a non-communal basis and in full co-
* operation with all other groups interested in this task.
In view of the difficult times that loom ahead, it is essential
that the Congress should fimction as an active and disciplined
organization. Provincial committees are enjoined to take
necessary steps for this purpose. They should realize that it is
of mgent and vital importance that the Congress should func-
tion in this way in these days of crisis, and should not be merely
a roll of vast numbers of inactive members. All members of
the executive committees, in particular, are expected to take
a continuous and active part in the Congress work, and those
who are unwilling or unable to do so are failing in their duty
to the country and are of no service to the 'organization.
The critical situation that faces the world today requires
vigilant attention and action whenever needed. For this pur-
pose the Working Committee will meet at frequent intervals,
and all members must keep in readiness to obey an urgent sum-
mons. The All India Congress Committee should be.summon-
. • ed to meet in the last week of July.
Harijan, 29-6-1940
VII
WHAT LED TO THE DECISION
A Historical Retrospect : 14 Years
Gandhiji’s decision to be responsible no longer to guide the
deliberations and policy of the Congress may have come upon
the members of the Working Committee and upon the country
with a certain amount of suddenness. But it was the natural
conclusion of a series of events since 1934- — or may I say since
1919 ? For his warning to the people first came to be uttered
after the mob violence in Nadiad and Ahmedabad, He shocked
his followers and amused his critics by proclaiming that in
placing the remedy of civil disobedience in the hands of people *
who had not learnt the discipline to listen and to obey he had
been guilty of a Himalayan blunder. Then came Chauri Chaura
and the momentous Bardoli decision suspending satyagraha in-
definitely. This gave the followers an even greater shock than
that given by the “Himalayan blunder”. But Gandhiji was
adamant. He knew that the country would realize the wisdom
of the decision in course of time, and that it would be able to
prepare itself for another struggle. It took the coimtry six or
seven years — years punctuated by communal rioting and in-
ternecine strife — ^to develop non-violent strength to hurl de-
fiance against the Government. We had learnt the virtue of
non-violence, but it had with most of us a limited meaning and
content. And yet it carried us through to a certain amount of
success. Then came more organized repression on behalf of
the Government, our limited non-violence proved a poor match
for it, and with that came the third milestone oh the march to
non-violence — I mean the Patna decision of 1934 suspending*
civil disobedience and confining it only to himself.
Throughout this period of fourteen years he belonged ^to
the Congress, he was a member of it, he attended meetings of
the A. I. C. C. and of the Working Committee, and actively par-
ticipated in the deliberations. But the Patna decision had set
him thinking. Always anxious to lay the -blame principally on
himself, he had begim to discover that the^ arrest in the growth
448
" WHAT LED TO THE DECISION 449 •
of the Congress and the corruption in its ranks was due to the
fact that t|ie .Congress “had degenerated into an organization
dominated 'by one personality, and that in it there was no free
play of reason.” There were vital differences between him and
the Congressmen, but his personality^ he felt, had acted like an
incubus on them and prevented their self-expression. That was
unconsciously encouraging hypocrisy and a subtle piece of vio-
lence. Khadi and the spinning wheel were there on the Con-
gress programme, “yet only a few Congressmen have a living
faith in the India-wide potency of the wheel.” And as for non-
violence, as he said in his historic statement issued in September ^
1934, “ after fourteen years of trial it still remains a policy with
the majority of Congressmen, whereas it is a fimdamental creed
with me. That Congressmen do not still regard non-violence
as a creed is no fault of theirs. It is undoubtedly my faulty
presentation,, and still more its faulty execution, that are res-
ponsible for this failure. I'have no consciousness of faulty pre-
sentation or execution, but' it is the only possible inference from
the fact that it has not yet become an integral part of the lives
of Congressmen." We had paid bp-loyalty to non-violence, and
even that non-violence was, not of the strong but of the weak.
“ If we were non-violent through and through, our. non-violence
would have been self-evident. . Nor were we able to show to the
terrorists that we had greater faith in .our non-violence than
they in their violence.” The argument led irresistibly to the
conclusion that he should leave the Congress organization as he
was -convinced that by being outside - he would serve the Con-
gress and the country better than by being in it. That was the
fourth milestone — the step to withdraw from the Congress
being solely dictated by the idea of making the experiment of
non-violence in thought, word and deed more intense. “For
this experiment,” he said, “ I need complete detachment and
absolute freedom of action. I can only search Him through
non-violence, and in no other way, and the freedom of my
country, as of the world, is surely included in .the search for
Truth. I cannot suspend this search for anything in this world
or another.” The wisdom of the decision, which was so to say
ratified by the Bombay Congress, was proved by a very simple
test. The amendment suggesting the substitution of the .words
“ truthful and non-violerit ” for “ peaceful and legitimate ” was
N. V.— 20
450 " NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
that simple test. The amendment was thrown out by the mem-
bers ^of the A. I. C, C., and proved clearly the thinness of the
faith of the bulk of Congressmen in truth and non-violence.
He retired from the Congress in October 1934 and threw
himself with redoubled zeal and vigour into the only land of
work that was an expression of non-violence — revival and
development of vdllage industries, Harijan service, education
through basic crafts, and fixing up one’s abode in a village which
offered in a nutshell all the problems of an Indian village. But
this retirement was far from giving him the “ complete detach-
ment and obsolute freedom ” of action that he was longing for.
For three years he had a certain amoxmt of respite, but the de-
cision to accept offices, taken by the Congress on his advice,
drew him once again into active leadership,
1934-39
Every step, throughout the period of fourteen or fifteen
years, had been for him an experiment in the pursuit of truth
and non-violence, and his advice to the Congress to take up the
burden of office acceptance was another such experiment. The
office acceptance was not intended to work the Act of 1935
anyhow ; “ in the prosecution by the Congress of its goal of
complete independence, it is a serious attempt on the one hand
to avoid a bloodj^' revolution and on the other to avoid mass civil
disobedience on a scale hitherto not attempted.” He declined
to have any authority over the ministers or to have any power
to issue instructions to them, but “in matters relating to' the
struggle for Swaraj through non-violent action, I do claim spe-
cial qualifications. For me office acceptance has a special mean-
ing even in terms of the Congress manifesto and resolutions.”
The Congress was not only to replace an alien Government, but
an alien method of governance. -It was to rule, he made it clear
in the very beginning, “ not through the police backed by the
military, but through its moral authority based upon the great-
est goodwill of the people. It will rule, not in virtue of author-
, ity derived from a superior armed power, but in virtue of the
ser\uce of the people whom it seeks to represent in every one
of its actions.”
That was said in August 1937. Since then every pronounce-
ment of his has been a commentary on the principle of action
laid down in the veiy^ beginning. Trouble in the Sholapur
WHAT LED TO THE DECISION
451
Settlement of Criminal Tribes ” and labour unrest in Ahmeda-
bad and Cawnpore gave him the first occasion to sound a warn-
ing, *‘Do we really believe in truth and non-violence, in
sustained work and discipline, in the efficacy of the fourfold
constructive programme ? If we are not sure of our own chosen
aims, we need not wonder if one fine morning we discover that we
had committed a grave blunder in embarking upon office accep-
tance. My conscience as a or the prime mover in the direction
of office acceptance is quite clear, I advised it on the supposi-
tion that the Congressmen as a whole were sound not only on
the goal but also on the truthful and non-violent means.^’
In 1938 came fiulher storm signals, and they gave Gandhiji
the opportunity of making the Congress position fiirther clearer.
The ministers Were to rule by moral authority based on the
greatest goodwill of the people, but what was the meaning of
that goodwill ? The Congress claimed to represent the whole
of India, not only the so-called Congressmen — to represent mean-
ing to serve their interests. And in that sense it had to serve
the interests of non-Congressmen leven better than those of Con-
gressmen, if it was to be true to its creed of non-violence. “ It
should represent even those who are hostile to it and who will
even crush it if they can. Not until we make good that claim
shall we be in a position to displace the British Government
andrfunction as an independent nation.” These words were
uttered two years ago, but it seems as though they were uttered
yesterday. The bulk of the Muslims and others belong to the
non-Congressmen’s camp. Have we the power — the non-
violent power — to represent^em today ? "If we have, we can
function as an independent nation in spite of Britain.
But to proceed. The riots in some of the cities of the U. P.
'and the steps taken by the Congress ministry to quell them
made Gandhiji pointedly ask the question : Js Congress non-
violence, non-violence of the weak and the helpless or of the
strong and the powerful ? "If it is the former, it will never
take, us to our goal, and if long practised may even render us
for ever unfit for self-government. If the Congress non-violence
does not come out of real strength, it would be best and honest
for the Congress to make such a declaration and make the neces-
sary changes in its behaviour. To the extent that the Congress
ministries have been obliged to make use of the police and the
452
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
military, to that extent, in my opinion, we must admit our
failure.”
His soul had already begun to get impatient. How long
would this experiment last, how long could he continue to give
his guidance if it was ultimately to be futile ? We discover this
impatience of the soul in numerous utterances of those days.
To some co-workers he said : “ I am ashamed that our ministries
had to call to their aid the police and the military. I am asham-
ed that they had to use the language that they did in reply to
the Opposition speeches.- I feel as if the Congress had lost and
the British had won. Why does our non-violence fail on such
occasions ? Is it the non-violence of the weak ? Even the
goondas should not move us from our faith arid make us say :
‘ We will send them to the gallows or shoot them down.’ They
too are our countrymen. If they will kill us, we will allow
them to do so. You cannot pit against organized violence the
non-violence of the weak, but the non-violence which the
bravest alone can exercise. We have, you will say, been suffi-
ciently non-violent. We were non-violent during the civil dis-
obedience campaign, we’ received lathi blows and worse. My
reply is this : We did, but not sufficiently. We could not get
independence at the end of the Dandi March, as ours was not
the 'Unadulterated non-violence of the bravest.”
The question of external aggression has cropped up just
now, but the question of internal unrest was already there as
alive as today. Had we the strength then to say to the goondasr
“ Kill us, we will not kill you ” ? We had not. But Gandhiji
lived in the hope that we should have that strength soon.
“ Supposing,” he said to the Gandhi Seva Sangh people at Delang
on the 25th of March, 1938, “the Viceroy were to invite the
President of the Congress to meet him and to state the Congress
terms, do you think he would have the strength to say, ‘The
Congress is capable of taking charge of the administration, the
British may go ’ ? Do you think v/e could tell him that we
should be able to do without the police and the military, that
we should be able to come to terms with the Princes, the
Zamindars and the Mussalmans ? I am afraid we could not'^
honestly say we should easily be able to come to terms with
these. And yet, if we had real non-violence in us, we should be
able to say and do these things,”
WHAT LED TO THE DECISION
453
But if the situation was bad in the middle of 1938, it is worse
in the middle of 1940. Someone asked Gandhiji the other day :
You think we have not the non-violence of the brave. Well,
then, I ask you what would you do if independence were ’to be
offer^ to you today ? Would you say no ?
He said : “ I would say no. I am giving an absurd answer
to an absurd question. The question is absurd, for indepen-
dence is not going to be offered, because we are not ready. If
we were ready, it would be there without our asking it.”
But I am anticipating events. There was impatience in the
.soul, but he was patient with the people. He was arguing with
the ministries, arguing with the people. “ In spite of our having
accepted the volunteer’s pledge for 17 years we have not deve-
loped the irresistible strength that such acceptance of ahimsa
means. The reason is that we have not troubled, we have not
laboured, to organize such a non-violent army. If we cannot
do so, if we cannot carry out the pledge, it would be well to
reconsider our position. The tragedy is that the pledge is still
in existence, but it exists on paper. If we had on a sufficient
scale such a non-violent army as the pledge contemplates, we
should not have had these riots ; and if there had been, we would
have quelled the riots or immolated, ourselves in the attempt.
We have heard of only one man who met his death. I admire
his seff-immolation. But my breast would have swelled with
joy if there had been several Guptas.”
“ If,” he said in an article written in that period, “the Con-
gress non-violence is merely confined to abstention from caus-
ing physical hurt to the British officials and their dependants;
.such non-violence can never bring us independence. It is bound
to be worsted in the final heat. Indeed we shall find it to be
worthless, if not positively harmful, long before the final heat
is reached.” And fhen this solemn warning : “ If we feel that
we shall not be able to displace the British power without a
violent struggle, the Congress must say so to the nation and pre-
pare accordingly. We must do what is being done all the world
•over — forbear when we cun, hit when we must, '' If that is to
be our creed or policy, we have lost precious seventeen years.
But it is never too late to learn and mend.”
454
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAB
The long tours of the Frontier Province that followed were
with the sole purpose of preparing the promising field for the
non-violence of the brave.
. And it was not that the ministries wholly failed.
What’s done we partly may compute.
But oft not what’s resisted. ,
If we were to go minutely into the history of the work of
the Congress ministries in the eight pro\dnces, we would find
that they had some triumphs of non-violence to their credit.
But God fulfils Himself in many ways. If the ministries' had
continued, w^ould they have been ultimately foimd- wanting ?
May it not have been providential that the situation created by
the war came as a godsend and compelled the ministries to
resign ? Who shall say ? But again I am anticipating events.
A Narrow Escape
The test had nearly come with the international crisis of
September 1938 and the rape of Czechoslovakia. But the dictat-
ed peace at Munich saved us. The Working Committee sat and
deliberated for some days, but the test in the shape of war did
not come. Gandhiji placed the implications of non-violence be-
fore the Working Committee in a manner that could not be
mistaken, and the Working Committee^ was so imanimously
with him that he was in a position to report : ^Mhe Working
Committee had almost come to the conclusion that it would
deny itself the opportunity of striking a bargain with England,
but would make its contribution to "the world peace, to the de-
fence of Czechoslovakia and to India’s freedom b3’' declaring to
the world by its action that the way to peace with honour did
not lie through mutual slaughter of the innocents, but that it
lay only and truly through the practice of organized non-vio-
lence even unto death.”
And in the course of a private conversation he used words
which had a prophetic ring, at least so far as he himself was
concerned :
“You may rest assured that whatever happens there will
be no surrender by the Government. For me, even if I stand
alone, there is no participation in the war even if the Govern-
ment should surrender the whole control to the Congress^-*
Who would have thought aeroplanes to be a practical reality
WHAT LED TO THE DECISION
455
r*
fifty years ago ? -Who would have imagined in this country,
thirty years ago, that thousands of innocent men, women and
children would be ready smilingly to march to prison? The
weapon of ahimsa does not need supermen or superwomen to
wield it ; beings of common clay can use and have used it before
this with success. At any rate fifteen members of the Working
Committee did express their readiness to put their ahimsa to
the test. That was more than I was prepared for.”
But we were not weighed, and our honour remained intact.
At any rate we did not die before our death.- What the Com-
mittee would have done if the crisis had actually come it is
difficult to say, but as we have seen it filled Gandhiji -with great
hopes.
The Crisis
Exactly a year after this the crisis was upon us. In that .
first hoiur of trial, the Congress was weighed and not found
wanting. It did not take the Working Committee long to issue
its mandate to the Congress ministries to resign. Gandhiji
heaved a sigh of relief. The questions that frequently torment-
ed him ceased to trouble his soul. If the Congress had accepted
his advice, in the initial stage, of offering unconditional co-ope-
ration, or if later the British Government had acceded to the
Congress demand for a declaration and the Congress had offer-
ed co-operation in response, the position for Gandhiji would
have been the same. For the co-operation he had contemplated
was moral co-operation and no other.- But who knows ? It
may be that even there there has, been providential intervention.
If the Working Committee had then taken the stand — the very
honest stand indeed — that it has taken now, the difficulty both
for the Committee and for Gandhiji would have been immense,
the situation more delicate. But as I have said God intervened.
The crisis in the shape of the collapse of one European na-
tion after another in quick succession came none too soon. ,
Gandhiji had waited in patience so long, trying to steer a diffi-
cult course through rocks and breakers. He had voluntarily
accepted the position of the Generalissimo. Was it wise ? The
speeches at the Ramgarh Congress were a mirror of the struggles
of his soul. In private he had implored the Working Committee
and the Maulana to relieve him of the position. It was simply
with a \new fo being able to render greater service to the
456 NON-VIOLENCE IN, PEACE AND 'WAR
Congress. “ I am putting upon myself an undue strain, but as it is
not yet a strain on my conscience, I'shall continue to serve you,
if you will insist on my doing so. But it is a terrible strain, and
I would implore you to free me. I should then pursue my ex-
periment of aliimsa with absolute freedom ” I am quoting from
memory, but that was the substance of his entreaty to the Work-
ing Committee. And when they did not relieve him he poured
out the depths of his soul in the two speeches at Ramgarh.
But the soul’s impatience continued. Would the Working
Committee face or quail before the coming storm ? Perhaps
they were taken by surprise, but not Gandhiji. The European
situation had for him a lesson that was unmistakably clear.
“ It fills me with the utmost non-violence,” he said. “ I cannot
think of a better thing to offer to Britain and the defeated na-
tions than non-violence. It is impossible for me to enthuse over
the deeds of Hitler or of those who fought or failed to fight him.
There is nothing to choose between the victory of Hitler and
the defeat of others. But I have no doubt in my mind-that even
a patched-up non-violent army would take the v^d out of
Hitler’s sails. I need not have his aeroplanes, tanks, etc. He
need not destroy our homes. Our non-violent army would wel-
come him, and it may be that he would not dare to come. I
know that this may be a day-dream. But I cannot belie the
principle of a lifetime or wipe out my day-dreams of the past
twenty years. If we have not the non-violent strength of the
brave to fight anarchy and aggression, let us say so and reduce
ourselves to a small minority hoping to develop non-violence
of the strong in the days to come.”
The Working Committee did some fierce thinking for days.
Those were the days of heart-searching for them. The logic of
Gandhiji’s propositions was invincible, but could they go with
those propositions to the people ? Were they so thoroughly
saturated themselves with the spirit of non-violence of the
brave to be able ^to carry conviction to the people ? Gandhiji
even drafted a resolution for them. But fain as they would
have it, sorely as they felt the wrench of having to do -without
his leadership and his advice, they could not be untrue to them-
selves. “We feel we could not accept your position with our
mind and heart and soul, and we feel. we should not entangle
you,” they said to him in effect. “ And if that is so, why should
WHAT IHD TO THE DECISION
457
we accept an untenable position merely to retain your connec-
tion ? It would be a fraud on ourselves and others.”
But if they could not be imtrue to themselves, neither could
Gandhiji be untrue to himself. He said to them : “ I must be
left free for my self-expression. I must be free to pursue my
search, and I know you will believe me when I say that I go
o*nly to be of more effective service to the Congress, to you and
the nation. Of course I shall be available when you want me.
But I can no longer identify myself with the direction of your
polic^ and programme. You will, therefore, try your best to
do without me and have your meetings in future not in Wardha
but elsewhere.”
It was said of old by a Teacher to his disciples : “Ye are
the salt of the earth : but if the salt have lost its savour, where-
with shall it be salted ?” Had those who for us have been “ the
salt of the earth ” lost their savour ? One cannot say. But
there were these words also uttered of old : “ Ye are the light
• of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid.” And
they may yet be those lights. In the meanwhile Gandhiji waits
and prays in silence. “ I should work single-handed in implicit
faith that what I fail to make clear to my countrymen today
shall be clear to them some day of itself or, if -God wills it,
through some apt word He may put in my mouth, or some apt
work which He may prompt me to do.” These words were
uttered in 1934, but they might have been uttered only the other |
day.
New Delhi, 1-7-40 M. D.
’ Harijan, 13-7-1940
vni
A. L C. c: RESOLUTION
Tbe following resolution was passed by the A, I/C. C. at Bombay
on 16th September, 1940:
The All India Confess Committee Has given Its careful
attention to the events that have taken, place since its last meet-
ing held in Poona on July 27, 1940, and to the resolutions passed
by the Working Committee at Wardha m August last. The
Conunittee approves of, and endorses these resolutions.
In order to end the deadlock in India and to promote the
national cause, in co-operation with the British people, the
Working Committee, even at the sacrifice of Mahatma Gandhi’s
co-operation, made a proposal to the British Government in their
Delhi resolution of ^July 7th, which was subsequently approved
by the A.LC.C. at Poona. This proposal was rejected by the ^
British Government in a manner which left no doubt that they
had no intention to recognize India’s independence, and wotild,
if they could, continue » to hold this country indefinitely
in bondage for British exploitation. This decision of the British
\ Government shows that they will impose their will upon India,
and their recent policy has further shovm that they will not
even, tolerate^ free expression of public opinion in condemnation
of their associating India in the war against Germany, against ,
the will of a vast body of the people of India, and oi exploiting
her national resources and man power for this purpose.
The All India Congress Committee cannot submit to a policy
which is a denial of India’s natural right to freedom, which
suppresses the free expression of public opinion, and which
would lead to the degradation of her people and their continued
enslavement. By following this policy the- British Govern-
ment have created an intolerable situation, and are imposing^
upon the Congress a struggle for the preservation of the honour
and the elementarj^ rights of the people. The Congress is pledg-
ed under Gandhiji’s leadership to non-\dolence for the vindica-
tion, of India’s freedom. At this grave crisis in the movement
for national freedom, the All India Congress Committee, there-
458
A.I.C.C. RESOLUTION
459 -
fore, requests him to guide the Congress in the action that should
be taken. The Delhi resolution, confirmed by the A. I. C. C..
at Poona which prevented him from so doing, no longer applies.
It has lapsed.
The A. I. C, C. sympathize with the British people as well
as the peoples of all other countries involved in the War. Con-
gressmen cannot withhold their admiration for the bravery and
endurance shown by the British nation in the face of danger
and peril. They can have no ill-will against them, and the
spirit of satyagrdha forbids the Congress from doing anything
with a view to embarrass them. But this self-imposed restraint
cannot be taken to the extent of self-extinction. The Congress
must insist on the fullest freedom to pursue its policy, based on
non-violence. _ The Congress has, however, no desire at the
present moment to extend non-violent resistance, should this
become necessary, beyond what it required for the preservation
of the liberties of the people.
In view of certain .misapprehensions that have arisen in'
regard to the Congress policy of non-violence the A. I. C. C.
desire to state this afresh, and' to make it clear that this policy
continues, notwithstanding anything contained in previous re-
solutions which may have led to these misapprehensions. This
Committee firmly believes in the policy and practice of non-
violence not only in the struggle for Swaraj, bu^also, in so far
as this may be possible of application, in free India. The Com-
mittee is convinced, and recent world events have demonstrat-'
ed, that complete world disarmament is necessary and the estab-
lishment of a new and juster political and economic order, if
the world is not to destroy itself and revert to barbarism. A'
free India will, therefore, thrbw all her weight in favour of
world disarmameht and should herself be prepared to give a
lead in this to the world. Such lead will inevitably depend on
external factors and internal conditions, but the State would
do its utmost to give effect to this policy of disarmament. Effec-
tive disarmament and the establishment of world peace by the
ending of national wars, depend ultimately on the removal of
the causes of wars and national conflicts. These causes must
be rooted out by the ending of the domination of one country
over another and the exploitation of one people or group by
another. To that end India will peacefully labour, and it is
460
NON-VIOUENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
with this objective in view, that the people’ of India desire to
attain the status of a free and independent nation. Such free-
dom will be the prelude to the close association with other
countries within a comity of free nations for the peace and pro-
gress of the world.
Harijan, 22-9-1940
IX
SEVEN DAYS IN BOMBAY
The Seven Days
An author of the history of the Russian Revolution wrote
some years ^ago, in diary form, a history of the happenings of
the ten days that preceded the birth of Soviet Russia. ‘ He gave
that book the title Ten Days That Shook the World. May it not
be that the seven days in Bombay — 12th to 18th — ^may come to be
recorded in, history as the Seven Days That Shook the World ?
And in a better sense perhaps ? The days in Russia had all
the colour and terror of a revolution. The Seven Days here
had a different character altogether. They were as peaceful as
anything can be, and they mark a distinct stage not only in
India’s march towards peaceful freedom but also perhaps in the
march of the world towards peace.
The whole setting was one of peace and not of war. ^ For
even if it was a gathering of men who were determined on war
for the assertion of their right to self-existence, it was a gather-
ing of people who would not hurt even a fly. The Government
had, therefore, no need fdr any elaborate police — not to say o'f
military — preparations in anticipation of what might happen.
Those who met were the guests of a most peaceful body of
people — the East India Cotton Association, who do not usually
interest themselves in politics^but who at this unique juncture
in the history of India braved the risk of being regarded as
having identified themselves \vith politics. For they knew that
the issue at stake concerned them no less than the rest of India,
perhaps more. ^
The Working Committee was facing the hour of the greatest
crisis in Congress history. The days since ^June 18 when they
SEVEN DAYS IN BOMBAY 461
issued what is kno\vn as the Wardha Statement had been days
of excruciating travail both for them and for Gandhiji. For
Gandhiji they had been days also of intense prayer. I may not
produce here a diary of the seven days, but Pandit Jawaharlal
in his speech at the A. I. C. C. described in one or two sentences
what had happened. He was in bitter pain over the wild and
irresponsible utterances of a handful of the members of the
Committee, and was trying to plead with them to see the error
of their ways. “ You know,” he said, “ what Gandhiji has done ?
He has accepted full responsibility for the resolution. But do
you know how it came into being ? How great he spiritually
is I do not know. But I know that politically he is without a
peer. So far as matters of principle are concerned his iron will
will not bend to any appeal for a compromise. But he listened
to us for hours, let every aspect and argument that we had to
press work Upon his mind. He produced one draft and then
another and then a- third until he saw that he had met the con-
siderations advanced by every one of us, and was not content
until the result was a resolution that was as far as possible the
collective reflection of the mind of us all.” (I am not quoting
his words, I took no notes, but I am giving the impression left
oii my mind by his moving speech.)
And as one could see it, Gandhiji seemed to grow from
moment to moment. He took two hours to produce the first
draft which became the basis of the resolution as it ultimately
emerged. He did not know that, in spite of the intense mental
labour that he had devoted to it, his draft reflected the minds
of the members. When he addressed the house in Hindi, though
he spoke in firm and measured tones there was trepidation and
hesitation. ‘^The responsibility I am assuming,” he said, “is
perhaps the greatest I have ever assumed in my life. I do not
know whether I shall succeed in satisfying you or even satis-
fying me. Nor have I the vaguest notion of the result. But
for over 50 years I have trained myseK never to be concerned
about the result. What I should be concerned about is the
means, and when I 'am sure of the purity of the means, faith is
enough to lead me on. All fear and trembling melt away be-
fore that faith, and once we have launched forth there is no
looking back.” In the English speech the firmness seemed to
have increased, the soul in him cried out : “ We have waited
462
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
long enough. Now comes the moment when the virtue of wait-
ing has become vice/' And yet he said: “There is impene-
trable darkness before me regarding the future course of action.
Would you trust your ship to a captain who is groping ? If you
would, well and good. Otherwise reject his generalship sum-
marily.” For days he had waited for light, but beheld obscu-
rity. A glimmer had appeared on the horizon with the confi-
dence with which he advised the Working Committee. But still
there was a pall of haze. The next day it had lifted, and he was
able to declare almost in the exaltation of certitude : “ The
thing I have placed before you is not small. I myself had
thought it was small. But it was not so. It has not come from
my intellect. It has come from recesses of the heart where
dweUeth the Innermost. It is He who has given it. It was born
at the end of infinite travail.”
Verily once more the words of the Psalmist had come true :
“ Light is sown for the righteous and gladness for the upright
in heart.”
When Virtue Becomes Vice
I have in brief given the setting in which the event happen-
ed. I shall now proceed to give the outstanding portions of his
three utterances. They have appeared at length in the Press,
but as they are xmpruned and imauthorized, one is apt to miss
the wood for the trees. Mine will be a rapid summary with
pauses at passages of outstanding importance.
An esteemed friend had sent him a telegram on the eve of
the decision xeminding him of the attitude of sympathy and of
unconditional co-operation that he had adopted at the beginning
of the war. He had not forgotten it. But if he could not take
the mind apd the heart of the Congressmen with him, that atti-
tude would have been useless. “ If what I said did not find an
echo in their hearts, they would have been of no use whatsoever
to the Viceroy, to the great British Nation, and to India.” But
even after the first resolution on the war adopted at Wardha
they had waited for exactly a year. He was not sorry that they
had waited, the waiting had been all to the good, it had given
him at any rate the strength to adopt the attitude he was taking.
Why did the very man who had day in and day out advised
non-embarrassment now stand before them with the latest re-
solution ? He said : “ There comes a time in man’s life when
SEVEN DAYS IN BOMBAY
463
virtue itself becomes vice. Virtue which was virtue in its time,
when torn from the purpose to which it was dedicated, becomes
vice. The exercise of self-restraint was good enough, but when
it threatened our very existence, the national spirit, whether
it abided in Congressmen or non-Congressmen, when it threaten- I
ed to kill the very spirit which enabled us to exercise self-
restraint, then that virtue becomes vice.” He proceeded : “ I
am speaking not only for the Congress, but for all who stand
for national freedom — Muslims, Parsis, Hindus, Christians —
even for those -who are against the Congress, so long as they
represent Indian aspirations, viz. unadulterated independence.
I should be untrue to all of them if I said now, ‘ No embarrass-
ment to the British.’ My repetition of it would be just as useful
for my salvation and for the guarding of my virtue as the repe-
tition by a parrot of God’s name which is but a mechanical vocal
effort y^ithout intelligence, and which cannot take him near to
God. Therefore, if I exercised that self-suppression at this cri-
tical moment in the history of the nation, it would be suicidal,
I should be untrue to myself. We cannot sit still when we see,
men like Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia and Jaiprakash Narain, than
whom I know no braver or straighter men, being marched to
jail. not because they preached violence but because they car-
ried out the behest of the Ramgarh resolution. It had ^become
a point of honour with them. It is not satyagraha to watch
thus people being marched to jail in the exercise of their right
of freedom of speech. If we looked on, the Congress would
•disappear and with it the national spirit. India, said the
Maulana, at the time of Nankana tragedy, was one vast prison,
and therefore, if we delivered her, we would easily be able to
free not one but all the gurudwaras. If our liberty of speech
is choked, the movement for the freedom of our country from
bondage is choked. Then, as I have said, the virtue of self-
restraint is going to become vice. The virtue cannot be exer-
cised, as the resolution says, to the extent of self-extinction —
extinction of the national spirit, wherever it resides whether
amongst Congressmen or non-Congressmen.”
We Learnt It from You
Further exercise of self-suppression, he explained, would
be an act-ninfriendly to Britain. We have learnt, from English-
.men, to value the priceless boon of freedom of speech. In
' I
464
NON-VIOLENCE IN MACE AND WAR
expressing his sympathy for Britan and his admiration of the
bravery of the British, Gandhiji brought this point out in a
striking way : “ We have sympathy for all the sufiering na-
tions in this war. I ^vish well of Britain. The destruction of
a single innocent child in England shocks me. "When I heard
of the impending damage to St. Paul’s I felt as much as I should
have if the Kashi Viswanath and the Jumma Masjid were in a
similar plight. I know the sentiment that surrounds St. Paul’s.
The news therefore shocked me. But what can I do beyond
saying that it has shocked me ? In spite of the shock, the Bri~
tish people are playing and dancing and carrying on their busi~
ness as usual, and we are told that an eleven year old lad writes
to his father that he would far rather be destroyed in England
with his parents than seek refuge in Canada. v^That fearlessness
is in their bones, and if we have learnt anything from them it
is that. Even if London and the whole of the British Isles were
to fall, they have the courage to carry on the fight from Canada,.
Australia or New Zealand. Therefore let us emulate their
bravery, let us not be carried away by our sympathy to the-
extent of neglecting our clear dut 5 ^”
That duty is to declare from the house-tops that we shall
have none of this war, we shall do nothing by way of providing
men, money or ammunition for the conduct of the war. To let
the Viceroy tell the world that the whole of India is with Bri-
tain in this war, is to allow him to deceive the w'orld. If the
war was being fought for democracy, with w^hat justice can that
claim be advanced when demo’cracy was being 'trampled to-
death in India ? Dominion Status \vas being promised, but the
Provincial Autonomy ^that was given to the provinces imder
their own Act was reduced to a mockery. ^ In his impassioned
Hindi utterance he asked : “Was Punjab consulted ? Was
Bengal consulted? Was Sind consulted? Was the Frontier
Prownce with a population of over 90 per cent Mussalmans con-
sulted before India was declared a belligerent ?’ Were the peo-
ple in these provinces asked whether they wished to join the
war ? How can one man, however good, be invested with so
much power over nearly 40 crores of people ? I am a friend
of the Viceroy and hope to remain his friend imtil the end of
my days, but the situation created by imposing him as a \drtuaL
dictator on India is intolerable. It is a negation of democracy.”
SEVEN DAYS IN BOMBAY '
465
The Demand
The Congress has during the past one year exhausted all
the means in its power to bring about an understanding with
Britain. It asked for a declaration of India’s independence. It
declared that it would be content if British Government were
prepared to accept a constitution framed by a Constituent As-
sembly. It offered a third alternative, and in doing so almost
stultified itself, nearly went back, as it seemed to me, on the
solemn professions of the past 20 years of its existence. It was
pledged to winning Swaraj by non-violence ; it forgot that in
promising Britain its active co-operation in the war effort in
case, Britain recognized India’s independence, it was contradict-
ing itself and offering to pay the price of its principle — for the
sake of independence. But happily even that offer was reject-
ed. Now comes the fourth offer in the field : Simply declare
that India is free to carry on, non-violently and openly, anti-war
propaganda, that India is free to preach non-co-operation with
Government in their war effort, and we will have no civil dis-
obedience.”
That is the lowest possible test of their honesty. Civil
liberties are the very foundation of democracy, and if you deny
them you deny democracy. Only the other day a British judge
defined the essence of democracy. Delivering judgment in an
action brought against The Daily Worker, Mr.^ Justice Stable
observed : The expression of views, no matter how unpopu-
lar, how fantastic or how wrong-headed they may appear to
the majority, is a right, and a right which I, among others, are
paid to see preserved. I subscribe wholeheartedly to the words
that fell from the hps of Mr. D. N. Pritt, K. C. (defending coun-
sel), that it is those views which are held by <jnly a few, those
views that are impopular, those views which do nm counter to
the views of the great majority of mankind, particularly in times
of national emotional crises such as war, it is those views which
.V. '
this' court should be particularly zealous to protect.” It would
seem that what is going on in India is the most flagrant nega-
tion of this elementary principle of democracy.
This is how Gandhiji put it in his direct simple language :
_ “ In order completely to clarify our position, I propose to ap-
proach the Viceroy, if he will be good enough to see me — and
I have ho doubt that he will — and to place my difficulties before
N. V,— 30 ^
466
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
him. I will approach him in your name, I will tell him
that this is the position to which we have been reduced. We
do not want to embarrass you and deflect you from your pur-
pose in regard to war effort. You go your way, and we go ours,
undeterred, the common ground being non-violence. If our
advice prevails, there will be^^no war effort on the part of our
people. If, on the other hand, without your using any but
moral pressure you find that they respond, then we cannot help
it. If you get assistance from the Princes, from the zamindars,
from anybody high or low, you can have it ; but let our voice
also be heard. If you do so, it will be eminently honourable ;
it will certainly be a feather in your cap. It will be honourable
oi you — ’although you are engaged in a life and death struggle
— that you have recognized this liberty. It wiU be honourable
of you that you do so although you have limitless powers to
choke our voice and give us the fullest possible freedom, con-
sistently with the observance of non-violence, to tell the people
of India not to join the war effort/’
That is the position that would put the Congress and the
British Government at ease with one another. As Gandluji put
it : “ The British c^ then say to the world, * Judge us by our
conduct.' Here in India we are playing the game/”
Whaf of Freedom ? <
Then, it may be asked, what about our demand for indepen-
dence ? Independence is contained in the right to declare and
preach non-co-operation with the war effort. “That liberty,”
he said, towards the close of his speech, “is the foundation of
yoxm Swaraj. If that foundation-stone is in danger, you have
to exert the whole of your might to defend that single stone.”
He explained this thought at greater length in his closing
speech :
^ “I am sorry that your mind has failed to grasp a very
simple but a very important point that I made yesterday. I
described the right of free speech as the foundation-stone of
Swaraj, Let me explain this. I have yet to come across a
complete definition of Swaraj. I do not think I have been able
to give it myself. I do not think even Jawaharlal has ever
given it. It is possible that someone from amongst you may be
able to give it, as it has often happened that others have defined
for me things I have been labouring for. If anyone can do so.
i
SEVEN DAYS IN BOMBAY
467
I shall gladly make him my guru. But this resolution con-
tains the seed of Swaraj. If you hold fast to it, all that the
movers of the various amendments desire 'is automatically
attained. If we can win this liberty of free speech — either by
fighting for it or by negotiation — we have secured everything
— free speech for a communist like Dr. Ashraf, and free speech
for a Forward Bloc-wallah like Sardar Sardul Singh. If I give
it a religious colour, I can caU it full religious liberty, the liberty
cultural and religious that the Muslims are asking for. You
say you want independence. But you forget that it is beyond
their power to give it to 'us. Nor can we be independent by
simply declaring that we are independent. We can be indepen-
dent only when, after the British have left, we can remain tm-
afraid and rule ourselves unafraid of any attack from any foreign
power — Japan, Germany, Russia or Afghanistan. It is absurd
to launch civil disobedience today for independence. How are
we io fight for independence with those whose own indepen-
dence is in grave -peril? Even if independence can- be given
by one nation to another, it is not possible for the English.
Those who are themselves in peril cannot save others. But if
they fight unto death for their freedom, if they are at all reason-
able, they must recognize our right of free speech. This they
can certainly do. It is our duty to fight for that right. If they
resist it and we have to fight and they are embarrassed, they
will have invited embarrassment themselves.
“This liberty is a concrete issue which needs no defining.
It is the foundation of freedom, especially when it has to be
taken non-violently. To surrender it is to surrender the only
means for attaining freedom.
“ When Rajaji told me that his own offer was easier for the
British to accept than mine, he was expressing half the truth.
It may b'e easy indeed for them to recognize our independence,
but I can imderstand, during the war, their" reluctance to grant
,us central responsible government. For once they grant it, they
have to carry on through us. One day it.may be Rajaji, another
day it may be Jawaharlal, and then it may be a Damodar Menon.
This co-operation that we offer them would be to them a com-
modity of doubtful value, for they do not trust us, and if I was
in the Viceroy’s position, I should understand his misgivings.
It is risky for them to carry on war through those whom they
468
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
do not trust. But where is the risk in letting everyone declare
that he is free to refuse aU co-operation in war and preach that
non-co-operation to everyone he conies across, unless they want
to enforce co-operation at the point of the bayonet ? ”
The Only Limiting Condition -
But the right sought to be asserted is subject to the condi-
tion that we observe non-violence. “ The condition is neces-
sary, because a Government that is based on violence cannot
tolerate violence. That is the unavoidable logic of violence.
But even those who are violently inclined need not despair, if
they will listen to me today. For if we win Swaraj through
non-violence, even the violent, if there are any, will have not
only the liberty to preach but to do violence. There would be
no army. But that will not prevent a Sikh or a Khaksar from
possessing a sword or swords. If the rest are all believers in
non-violence, what violence can these inflict ? The restraint
of speech and action of the majority ^viU automatically exercise
similar restraint on those who are contrarily inclined. At any
rate, if I had my way as the president of a non-woleht Indian
republic, I should not hesitate to give those who are violently
inclined, the liberty of violent speech. On the other hand, let
me tell them that under a ^olent^tate they cannot expect that
liberty.
“ Let me tell those who want mass civil disobedience, strikes,
no-rent campaigns, that they forget that all those things are
there in -our old resolution of 1920. In fact I have been striving
all these years to prepare the country for all these things. We
should have been able to do all of ^em and to bring about a
new social order by now, if only we had observed the conditions.
And if we did not observe the conditions and were not ready,
none but we were to blame.
' “But you are ^ee to organize mass ciwl disobedience if
you like, though ^’'ou will then be guilty of indiscipline. But,
as I said to Subhas Babu who put me the same question, I shall
gladly congratulate you if you succeed, but you cannot ha\"e
my blessings. Of course, the honourable course for you would
be to leave the Congress.
"But you know that you cannot organize mass disobedience
at the present stage without violence. For similar reasons I am
asking students not to leave colleges to join satyagralia, unless
SEVEN DAYS IN BOMBAY
469
they will leave them for good. Similarly about strikes. Dr.
Suresh Bannerji, who was once a co-worker but who has for
some years strayed away from me but seems now to be coming
back, said to me some time ago that only I could conduct a labour
strike to a successful conclusion. I can do all these things, if I
h'ave your full co-operation and complete discipline.”
The Effect
As regards the immediate effect Gandhiji said : “When we
come to our own, the Government will be in charge not only of
the Congressmen but of non-Congressmen. There will be adult
suffrage, and the Government will be formed by the elected
. representatives of all the adult voters — Hindus, Muslims,
Parsis, Christians, Jews, and those whom we foolishly have
regarded as imtouchables. What a mixed parliament of these
representatives will do I do not know. But I hope that the
Congress vote will always be in favour of non-violence.
' If it is in a minority, it will record its vote ; if it is in
a majority, it will administer the State non-violently. For the
Congress as Congress can do nothing else. Supposing the Gov-
ernment accepts our demand tomorrow and says : ‘ Do wHat
you like in future, but now please do help us with men and
money.’ I arn afraid even then we shall have to say to them :
‘We are sorry we cannot give the co-operation. We wish you
well, and may God help you. But committed as we are to the
policy of non-violeiice, nothing that you can offer can persuade
us to give you violent assistance.’ ”
In the interval between now and Gandhiji’s return from a
visit to the Viceroy, what is to be done ? Gandhiji said : “ I am
going to see the Viceroy, but I may fail in my mission. I have
never approached a mission in despair. I have approached it
with the consciousness that I may be faced with a blind wall.
But I have often penetrated blind walls. But if I fail, we shall
be free to assert our right to carry on anti-war propaganda and
take the consequences. You are of course free to carry on the
propaganda from now, but it will not be fair, it will not be res-
traint. I would, ther^ore, ask you to be patient until my return
from the Viceroy.”
Since, this was written, the Working Committee passed the
following resolution which leaves no manner of doubt about the
Congressmen’s duty during the interval :
470
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
“ In view of the resolution just passed by the A. I. C. C., the
Working Committee calls upon all Congress organizations to
stop all civil disobedience, individual or other, pending definite
instructions of Gandhiji. He regards this suspension as
indispensable for his pending interview with H. E. the Viceroy,
and as a test of the discipline of registered and unregistered
Congressmen and all Congress-minded men and women, and
also as a short course of obedience to law before recourse to
civil disobedience, should it become necessaiy.” ^
The Hindu-Muslim Question
In his closing speech Gandhiji referred to the Hindu-Mus-
lim question, as it had been raised during the debate. He said :
“ If a conflict is there in store for us, who can prevent it ? We
have to be prepared even for anarchy and chaos, but we must
have the faith that non-violence cannot result in chaos. But if
some how disorders, take place, they will be a test of our nonr
violence. Non-violence is a force that gains ^ in intensity with
the increase in the violence that it has to deal with. I hope that
you will get that power of non-violence before I die. But there
is a message I should like to reach the ears of every Mussalman.
India cannot win independence, if eight or more crores of Mussal-
mans are opposed to it. But I cannot believe that all of them
are so opposed, until it is proved to me by the vote of every
r adult Mussalman. Let them declare that they want to have
their political salvation apart from that of the Hindus. India is
a poor- country full of Hindus and I/Tussalinans and others stay-
ing in every comer of it. To divide it into two is worse than
anarchy. It is vivisection which cannot be tolerated — -^not
because I am a Hindu, for I am speaking from this platform' as
representative of Hindus, Muslims, Parsis and all else. But I
\vill say to them, ‘Vmsect me before you vivisect India. You
shall not do what even the Moghuls,' who ruled over India for
over two centuries, did not do.’ What I have said about the
Muslims applies equally to Sikhs. If 30 lakhs of Sikhs will
obstruct Indian independence, we shall deal 'with * them non-
violently. Non-violent Swaraj cannot be won except by non-
violence. There are other obstacles, too, imposed* by the
.existence of an alien power. But we must strain every nerve
to achieve communal peace. Islam means peace. That peace
cannot be confined to the Muslims. It must mean peace for the
whole world.”
SEVEN DAYS IN BOMBAY
471
Implications of the Resolution
The representative of the American Associated Press saw
Gandhiji in Bombay within twentyfour hours of the termina-
tion of the A. 1. C. C. said: “Hundreds of our papers have
printed the A. I. C. C. resolution and a summary of your
speeches wired by me, and have commented on it. Four ques-
tions emerge out of these comments, and I seek your answers
to the questions. Gandhiji was immersed up to the ears in work,*
and was actually attending a meeting of the Working Committee
when Mr. Stimson arrived. He interrupted the meeting and
dictated his answers to the four questions.
The first question was; “How do you desire not to embarrass
Britain with your demand to preach anti-war propaganda in a
non-violent way?^^
Gandhiji said: “Because non-violence is the Congress
creed which involves Congress hostility to all war. Hence it is
a vital necessity for the Congress to dissociate itself from identi-
fying itself with any war. Hence my desire not to embarrass
Britain was necessarily limited and conditioned by the counter
necessity of preserving the Congress existence, and therefore
civil disobedience is definitely restricted to freedom of speech
and action, provided they are absolutely non-viblent. There-
fore I have claimed in my speech that, if the full import of
Congress action is understood, It baust in the end help Britain
and the world.’^ . n
“ Why,” wondered Mr. Stimson.
“ Because in the midst of the conflagration all round there
is one powerful body pinning its faith to uttermost non-violence.
If it succeeds, then the groaning world can heave a sigh of relief
and find a way out of these monstrous armaments.”
The second question was; “ How do you visualize the
future of India in the event of a Nazi victory ? ”
A. All I can say is — I am not dismayed by the prospect, if
my country remains true to the cult of non-violence. But that
does not mean that I should be in any way pleased with the
prospect of a' Nazi victory. What terrifies me is that as things
are- going on at present defeat of Nazism will be bought at a
terrific price, viz., superior Nazism, call it by any name you like.
Q. In view of what has happened in Malabar, is there any
hope of mass civil disobedience being carried on non-violently ?
472 NON-VIOIiENCE IN PEACE AND WAN
Not at present, and therefore, as you must have notic-
ed, in my speech I made .an emphatic declaration that so far as i
I was concerned there was no prospect of my embarking on
mass civil disobedience. But if you ask me whether it is pos-
sible to conduct mass civil disobedience without its resulting in
violence, I would emphatically say ‘ yes But my country is
not at present ready for mass action, and in a way I am
thankful that the unfortunate events in Malabar have come as
a warning to the country and a pointer for me also.
Mr. Stimson’s last question was: Does your' policy mean
disapproval of America’s help to Britain in the shape of planes
and munitions ?
A. Not in the slightest. For the simple reason that
America does not believe with the Indian National Congress in
non-violent action. I wish it did. Then America’s contribution
to peace and help to Britain would be infinitely more substantial
than any number of planes and any amount of material that
America can suppty to Britain. And if the weekty correspon-
dence I receive from America and visits from Americans who
come to see me is any index to' American opinion, I expect' Ame-
rica to take a. leaf out of the Congress book and outrun the Con-
' gress in the race for the establishment of peace on earth through
universal disarmament.
Am I Inconsistent ?
The correspondent of The News Chronicle^ who interview-
ed Gandhiji in Bombay on the 18th, saw him when he had
already had a heavy day on the top of a night of insufficient
sleep, and when he had heavy engagements yet to fulfil. But as
he presented a conundrum on behalf of the British people,
Gandhiji gladly found time for him and replied to his question
which was as jollows: “While expressing your sympathy with
the British people in their plight, don’t you think there is an
inconsistency between your earlier decisions and your latest
decision ? ”
“I thought,” said Gandliiji replying to the question, “that
I had clearly and sufficiently explained my position in my
speech, in anticipation of the charge of inconsistency. If there
is any inconsistency, it is due in this particular instance to
changed circumstances. My sympathy is not only the same as
it had been expressed in Simla on the declaration of war, it has
SEVEN DAYS IN BOMBAY
473
become deeper because what was imaginary had become vividly
real. In Simla almost- a year ago I had expressed my grief over
what might befall Britain. Today the dreaded thing has hap-
pened and is still going on. By nature I am so framed that
every calamity moves me irre.spective of the people whom it.
may overtake. But my sympathy, even though it is deeper
today than a year ago, has undoubtedly, changed in for™- ^as
unprepared for the recent Government declarations, an c ai-
that it is the genuineness of my sympathy which has made me
single out the one fact which Britain can easiy j.,
yield without any hitch in her prosecution of war. I ^
grant that there might be some reason for not divid g ^ .
responsibility for the conduct of the war with t^os^JJ^o
the determined opponents of British imperia ism „t;nued
plies, and therefore I felt that, if Congress continued
to abide by its policy of nonrombarrassment w ic v, noi-
its non-violence, the Congress should for the ^ freedom
tation by way of direct action for indepepndence. Jut freedji.^
of speech and corresponding action is the rea ^ ^
life Freedom of propagating non-violence as s JstitJe tor
war is the most relevant when Congress will
iJ out ot 4 that is
sequences — it ceased to agita g checked by some-
being’ perpetrated in Europe ^ ^hole world. I
.body or some organization, may overta -^terpret it, as its
hope this statement of ^‘British public opinion, but
sole guide, wUl not 3 tC Js. so as to
Will make it range -itself on the Congress
enable the Viceroy to 33ch is a claim for
claim, which IS => 1, „hom. exercised so long as it
freedom of speech no matter by wuu
does not promote violence in any shape or form. ^ ^
Bombay, 18-9-40
Harijan, 22-9-1940
X
I MORE ABOUT THE RESOLUTION
For the Blasses
In my hurried notes last week on the A. L C. C. resolution
there were certain points that I omitted and would like to take
up this v/eek. What has pained Gandhiji most about the Delhi
resolution and the'^Poona i:esoIution v/as not onty that we would
contradict ourselves by pa 3 ung non-\dolence as the price of inde-
pendence, when we had all along been declaring that we would
win independence by non-\dolence; worse than that contradic-^
tion was the fact that the resolutions, if acted upon, would have
been a sad betrayal of the masses whom for twent37 ^^ears vce '
had made non-violence-minded and whom we would now make
war-minded. It is for the sake of them, he explained in his
Hindi speech, that he welcomed the Bomba^^ resolution. “For.’’
said he. ''the Congress strength is derived not from the mem-
bers on the Congress registers but from the millions who have
never entered the Congress but who feel that the Congress
represents them. If* is that character that makes the Cqngress
speak for the Hindus, Muslims, Parsis, Christians, Jews and all.
Throughout its history of over fifty \^ears it has had not only
Hindu presidents, but jMuslim and Parsi presidents, who made
no distinction between different communities, and who proved
that those who rendered the highest sendee to the nation and
who desired its freedom could take charge of it. The Congress
had been described by some of its critics as a fascist organiza- ^
^ tion. But if the\^^adinit that the Congress has no other weapon
but non-\dolence, they disprove their charge. For Fascism.
Nazism and Imperialism depend for their existence on violence.
The Congress could not hold together without non-\iolence.
Non-violence and satyagralia, its active principle, constitute
the sovereign remedy which could be applied b^* all the mino-,
rities in the countr^^ and which was for even the smallest
minority a sure safeguard against the tyi'anny of the majority
however big it might be. Non-violence was thus bound up
with the very existence of the Congress, and to give it up would
X be to betray it and the masses for whom it stood ”
474
MORE ABOUT THE RESOLUTION
4.75-
A visitor recently asked Gandhiji if his re-entry meant that
the Congress had become again non-violent at heart. “ So lar
as I can say from things in the Punjab,” said the ^nsitor, I think
that, though there is a good deal of self-restraint, there is lit
Gandhiji replied : “ I agree. The resolution is the result of
•several days’ full-fledged debate among the ^
Working Committee. I may confess that many of the i^e^ib'm®
have no independent faith in non-violence but they are trying
to imbibe it. But you must know that
merely the Working Committee, nor t e . . • j^j^ions
momliers on the Congress registers, but the ^umb mil •
They are all peace-loving, and we have to
These millions, before the Congress identified itself with them
in 1919, had taken no part in any violent or ^on^violent
a .so-called constitutional fight. But they rose like one man on
.the Gth of April 1919. They took up peaceful rebellio th
mantra, and without any organization wi ou
„lde tour-for I had not then toured
instinctively took up the call, an Bombay resolution
became a peaceful rebel organization.
had these masses in mind.”
. No Threat
It is surprising that a paper ^threat ^oT civil
of an intention to go to the Viceroy ronious extracts,
disobedience. ' The very same paper pu ® enough tO'
from Gandhiji’s speech from which the following are enoug
prove that there was' no such mtention . resolu-
-<Il.ere is one thing which^ is -°\X 7oAi"g Co-mittee
tlon. in giving mo the -thonty J^fo hurl civil dis-
has done, there is a reservation Government without
obedience or anything in the fac to the sum total
01 GoLnmonl actions - actions Srotary ol State-
tion of the Viceroy, then the ° the policy that the
. .for India, and then the series of acUons and the p J
Government have pursued since. indelible im-
The sum total of all these things tome
pression on my mind that there i , j nation, and that
injustice, being perpetrated against the whole
476 NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE' AND WAR
the voice of freedom is about to be stifled. It is there in the
resolution, not in the exact language which I am using now,
but you will see the meaning clear as day-light. In order com-
pletely, to clarify our position, I propose to approach the Viceroy
with a request that he will be good enough to see me, and I have
no doubt that he wilL I will place my difficulties before him ;
I will place the Congress difliculties before him. I will approach
him in your name. I will tell him that this ^is the position to
which we have been reduced : We do not want to embarrass
you and deflect you from your purpose in regard to war effort.
We go our way, and you go yours, undeterred, the common
ground being non-violence. Left free to ourselves, there wiU
be no war effort on the part of our people. If, on the other hand,
without your using any but moral pressure you find that they
respond, then we cannot help it. If you get assistance from the
Princes, from the zamindars, from anybody high or low, you
can have it ; but let our voice also be heard., If you do so, it
will be eminently, honourable, it will certainly be a feather in
your cap. It will be honourable of you, although you are engag-
ed in a life and death struggle, that you have given us this
liberty. It will be honourable of you that you take this great
step although you have limitless powers to choke our voice, and
give us the fullest possible freedom, consistently with the
observance of non-violence, to tell the people of India not to
join the war.’’
The Demand
While some have regarded the Congress demand as too
difficult to be accepted, some have regarded at as too trifling.
A talk that Gandhiji had with an ashram youngster may be
summarized for the benefit of both. “If,” asked the youngster,
“the Congress demand is complete, it means that we do- not
need Swaraj, and that we shall be content with the liberty of
speech and the Press.” •
“ Our objective is complete independence, as you know.
But do you know the means to attain it ? ”
“Carrying out the constructive programme.”
“ That is one of the principal branches of the tree. . But
what is the root ? ”
“Truth and non-violence.”
MORE ABOUT THE RESOLUTION
477
“Well, then, we want the right to preach truth and non-
violence/’
“ But will newspaper articles and speeches be enough for
the propagation of truth and non-violence ? ”
“No, we have to do much more. But the right to preach
truth and non-violence is threatened. The law seems to say
that we may not teU people that they have every right not to
co-operate in the war effort, and that it is their duty as non-
violent people not to co-operate thus.”
“ But you have yourself said that we can get Swaraj if we
fulfil the constructive programme. Why then this trivial
issue ? ”
“ It is not a trivial issue, it is a concrete and aU-important
issue. If we surrender it, a time wiU come when we may have
to surrender all, when we may have to forget even the name o
truth and non-violence. To preach these is our birt ig , an
to forfeit it is to forfeit our existence.
“But what I am troubled about is the emphasis on mere
speech and writing.”
“ It is the liberty we claim. How and when to use it an
whether to use it or no is our concern. If we canno ®
strong breeze, we shut the windows and even doors. But h
should we feel, if someone were to shut us up .
“ I see. But may it not be imaginary ? If y®"
. child not to eat earth, it will eat it. It f ^ o » ^
galling. Do you want to remove the inhibition . ....
“ The analogy is wrong, for the little has no righ to
eat earth, whereas no one has a right to prevent u
ing free air. But let me take another example fo y > ^
are a child. Prahlad was ordered by his father not ^ ^the
name of Rama (God) . He might have Rama is in
lose nothing by not repeating the name o -^vould
my heart.’ But if he had resorted to this ^^/J^°his
'have deceived himself. He did not o so, un' repeating
father to do his worst, he was not going ^ . hardships
Ra^nama. And because he braved the
and daired even death for that faith would
living faith in Ramanama. If he h y
have vanished from thfe earth. Even , ever.”
to preach truth and non-violence, we give
478
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
“But abstract truth and non-violence no one prevents us
from preaching.’^
“No principle exists in the abstract. Without its concrete
application it has no meaning. And when I want to preach non-
violence I want to preach it as aQ effective substitute for war,
and thereby to be able to wean Britain and other warring
countries from violence and barbarism.”
Why for All ?
“ But,” someone argued, “ why do you clmm that right for
aU ? In yoiir speech you said that you would speak as a con-
scientious objector, but that others might use any reasoning
they liked — e.g., the' financial or the imperialistic argument.”
“ I have no business to^claim the right only for myself and
for those who "are conscientious objectors. For some other
grounds may be as important as, if not more than conscientious
groimds ; and if I may not be smothered, how can I suffer those
others to be smothered ? If, moreover, the liberty was restrict-
ed to conscientious objectors, we should compel a number of
our people to be hypocrites, for they would take shelter under
the conscientious argument. All that is necessary is the accep-
tance by all of the condition of non-violence. That cannot be
relaxed.”
A ^ Columbus ^ ^
Twice during the past few days Gandhiji likened himself
to Columbus, — first after the last Wardha meeting of the Work-
ing Committee, and then in his speech at the close of A. I. C. C.
proceedings. On this second occasion he went into some Retail
in giving the comparison : “ I do not ask you to appoint me your
captain as a favour. I would entreat you to do a number of'
other things, but I do not entreat you to make me
your captain. If you \vith eyes open and your minds
clear feel that you should make me your captain, you
may do so, not otherwise. For, unless I have your minds
and hearts with me, we cannot reach the promised land,
r am in the same predicament as Columbiis when he
started on his voyage to discover India. Perhaps I am in a
worse plight in that I have no chart and no compass which
Columbus had. I therefore ask for your implicit obedience and
discipline as the ship’s officers and crew. We have to be an army
MORE ABOUT THE RESOLUTION
479
5n action tomorrow, and unless you give unflinching discipline,
we shall be nowhere, A ship!s captain flever brooks indisci-
pline, and may even relieve the ship of the insubordinate crew.^’
It would be interesting for a moment to see the points of
similarity and dissimilarity; in the comparison. Columbus
before he started on hik voyage made himself admiral and as-
sumed full powers as Gandhiji has done. His journey was peri-
lous, and though he had a chart and compass, the journey was
-over uncharted seas. But the comparison ends there. The bulk
of his 88 crews were criminals and vagabonds who had been
^iven the choice between imprisonment and this perilous voyage.
They were so indisciplined and wrong-headed that they did
threaten to mutiny and even to push Columbus overboard
some dark night. To control these men Columbus had
to have recourse to deception, threats, promises ! The very
nature of our struggle makes these conditions impossible, and
Gandhiji has promised in advance to make room for a better
captain in case he fails, or even without, if people do not want
Jhim.
Sevagram, 23-9-40
Harijany 29-9-1940
M. d;
XI
CREED V. POLICY OF NON-VIOLENCE
[More than a month ago Dr. Katju sent to Shri Kishorlal
Mashruwala what may be called a short thesis on non-violehce.
The latter was to decide what to make of it and, if he liked,
show it to me. Shri Mashruwala gave it to me some time ago.
But I could get time to read it only during the journey. I read
it carefully. It was too long for publication in Harijan ; and yet
I felt that it should -be placed before the readers of Harijan in
some form. The following is the result. I have spent consider-
able time in reducing the original without leaving out the essen-
tial argument. I wholly agree with. Dr. Katju that non-violence
cannot make further headway without the Congress making it
a creed. He suggests that there should be a plan to show how it
can be worked under given circumstances. He suggested a book
or a series for the guidance of the votaries. Much literature has
spnmg up on the subject. Richard Gregg has spent years of
l^our in research. He has written text-books for the guidance
of the votaries of the West. His books are very readable. Let
Dr. Katju set apart time for producing a book which would be
a guide for us in India at this critical hour.
On the train to Wardha, 5-4-42 M. K. G.3
The efficiency of non-violence with non-co-operation as a
potent instrument of defence against external aggression has
been very much discussed during the last three years.
Gandhiji, has emphasized that what can win us our freedom
from British control must also prove equally^ useful to protect
that freedom from violent attack. But the Working Committee
' were not prepared to go that length, and they said so in the
well-kno\vn Wardha resolution last year. They thought that
the coimtry was not prepared to go that length.'^ In this, I think,
the Working Committee were quite right.
The shattering events of the last two years in the present
war have influenced men in different ways. JYom many, with
the growing realization of India’s utter defencelessness, there
is an insistent demand for rapid ‘ militarization ’ and industria-
480
I
CREED V. POLICY OF NON-VIOLENCE
481
lization. On others, however, the reaction has been in a con-
trary direction, and they now realize vividly, as never before,
the utter futility of resort to violence for purposes of defence.
The collapse of strong, well-armed armies in Poland, Norvray,
France, Yugoslavia and Greece, and last of all the carnage in
Russia, have shown to* them — and I am one of those persons-- .
that armed defence leads nowhere. If civilization and human
liberties are to be saved, we must seek and. ensure peace by
means of non-violence. It is obvious that non-violence can be
of no use to nations imperialistically inclined to conquer and
exploit others. That, I take it, is not the ambition of any Indian.
So the question is only of the defence of a free India.
It must be conceded that, though the Congress has been
working on non-violent lines for the last twenty years, that has
only been as a matter of policy. Leaving Gandhiji aside our
leaders have not presented to the people the excellent doctrine
of non-violence with all its possibilities and implications. Few,
very few, have believed in it as a creed ; and anyone who ad-
vocates its adoption as a mere matter of policy is likely to break
down at the critical juncture. I think that on those of us who
believe in the matchless efficacy of non-violence and non-co-ope-
ration as an instrument of defence and protection against exter-
nal aggression now rests the duty of infusing into, and inspiring,
our countrymen with that faith.
Previous preparation is essential. Just as you cannot turn
an ordinary citizen into a trained and disciplined soldier over-
night or manufacture guns and aeroplanes in a week, similarly
you require time and patience to train a whole people in the art
of non-violence and non-co-operation.
Violence has stolen a long march during thousands of years.
There are so many misconceptions to be removed. Non-violence
is unintelligible to so many. To some it is a counsel of perfec-
tion, fit for rishis only. To others it is stupid ; there is seemingly
such a childlike faith in violence. Non-violence ceases to be
stupid when it is considered as non-co-operation. The present-
aggressor does not conquer in order to exterminate and
settle down. He conquers or seeks to conquer in order to ex-
ploit, and it is at that stage that non-co-operation comes in.
We have to explain, to expound, to remove doubts, and to
endeayour to make even the lame, the halt and the blind into
N V.-81
/EUI 9U j9A30qM JO UBmqSTiSua am ‘J8USI9J0J iCuE UO p3TJtJe9
aq ;ouuBD srpui 9qil ^J^unoD Siq. B jo uonHJisimmpE 9 qi
\ 'snoqaA
-JBUI St S9SSBUI 9q^ SuOUIB SuiU95I9AVB '[^OT^qod Qq,!, p99ptn
;b 9 J§ U 99 q seq ssaoons jno ‘^oqod jo jb^bui 9 J 9 tii b sb poq;at«
aq:^ jo :}msjnd oq 9 goiodB puB p 9 :jJB 9 q-nHq mo jo 9 qds tq ‘qqBj
JO ssBuqBaAY jno jo gjtds tit ‘sgutuioDjJoqs diSbij Jno jo ajtds uj
; poTtBj iJnBOJ poqj 9 tu 9 q^ sBq puv -tpiqpuBD auiBiq 9 iA ja^C pua
f SJ9UUIF jsajBaJg am — sassBp aippim pajBonpa-qsqSua aqj^oj
iCtjEjnotjjBd J9J9J I — s9Aj9Sino 9JB 9^ ‘sjuauiujopB uiaqj japis
-tioo ptiB sajqoBqs qons tio jnd oj j^jsnonuaJjs jrpqBj uatii SunoiC
jsajqgtjq jno puB ‘sn iCq pauuBUi 9JB saotAJas jtAto aqj puB aoqod
aqj ‘.'CuiJB aqj;, ' i aotAJas qons tit jtiojS ptiB aptjd aqBj ti9A9
uajjo puB sjajsBtu jno 9 aj9S jou 9AV oq I tiotjBjado-OD umo jno
no pasBq i^jaatjua sjt ut ajnj qstjtja jou sj i aotApB stq paA\onoj
iCqB9J 9 AV 9 ABq jng -sastApB aq poqjam aq:^ jtABD 0 m puB
‘uiopaajj JOj ajgStujs jBotjqod jno tit ssaoons ajaiduioo jo qoBj joj
iCtqpuBO atiiBjq aj^ ’tiotjBnjts juasajd jno jopistioo jsnp
qtA 9 qqA\ ajBjado-oo puB jCaqo oj jBsnjaj pauiuijaj
-op B puB ‘atp oj ssatitpBaJ ‘aotiajotA-tioti oj qjStiajjs ptiB JaAvod
saAtg qotqAV uotjBjado-oo-uou st jj ‘JB 9 J jo ptoAap puB qjtBj
JO uijq puB pajJBoq-jnojs st auo paptAOJd ‘ji jo jtBAB oj /Apoq
ut qB 9 A\ aqj sb qaAV sb Suojjs aqj ‘pitqo puB ubuioav, ‘ubui ‘auo
-iCjaAa sjtuijad jt snqi 'Butqj ajtstnboj aqj st jBqj l^tJtds jo iJj 9 A'
-Bjq aqj st jt ‘ajoui st jBqAV puB ‘ jsaABjq aqj jo ‘gutiCBS jo pajij
jaAau st tCtqpuBO sb ‘uodBaAi aqj st jj -satJBjoA jtaqj ut aoq
-tjoBS puB agBjnoD jsajBajg aqj ajinbaj iCaqj JaqjaSoj uaqBj puy
•jotJBqo aqj jo sjaaqAV 0 A\j ajB uotjBjado-oo-uou puB aouajotA-uoj^
•uoijBjado-oo-uou uodn ptB]; jou st aouajstsut jBnba.jBqj jobj aqj
OJ anp ^jjJBd SI uoijou asjBj stqj, ‘iCjTPI'^P P“s aotpjBAAoo Joj
auiBu jaqjouB jCpjaui St aouajotA-uou jBqj A\oqs oj nOiC ajojaq
jnd suinjpunuoo jo sjjos jjb aABq noji^, •guqiBajsiui aq oj jdB
st uoijDB ajajouoo jnoqjtAi aouapiA-uou ajaui uo aouajstsuj
•s3Aq iCjBjduiaxa jno iCq qB aAoqB
puB ‘ssajd \aqj puB suoissnosip ajBAtjd ‘sgutjaatu oqqnd ‘sapap
iCpnjs ‘uotjBonpa oqqnd jo spoqjaui iCq Sutqutqj jo SiCBM jno oj
ajdoad aqj apansjad oj pajoajtp aq jsnui uotjOB jo auiuiBjgojd
apqA\ jno og ‘saAjasjno oj ptqjoj aA\ asn jBqj puB f aouapp
puB aojoj JO asn aqj iCq ‘jjosaj jsbj aqj ut ‘uotjounj yCjuo ubo
‘ ajdoad aqj jo /IjuoCbui jsba b jo juasuoo auinuaS puB SutqiAV aqj
88f aoNaioiA-NON ao Aonod 'a aaaao
CREED V. POLICY OF NON-VIOLENCE
485
ganized mass movement based on non -violence and non-co-ope-
ration for the noble purpose of winning or retaining national
independence must raise people, not only young well-built
soldiers but even the old and the infirm and men and women
alikej^to greater heights than a bloody war ever can. It is the
hearts of the leaders that doubt and quail, but the heart of the
common people is sound enough.
Non-co-operation with the aggressor and the foreigner is
plain enough.' That will obviously involve the non-payment o
taxes,, a refusal to enter his service or do his bidding, a refusa
to work in his mills and factories, and non-resort to his law
courts. But it may become necessary even to non-co-operate
with those of our countrymen, our own kith and km, ^ °
the national wiU and co-operate with the aggressor. T g
to remember is that our non-co-operation has always to be nom
violent and .will, therefore, never do personal m]u^ th
opponent. So there should be no interference ^ ^
of water to the thirsty or food to the himgry, me n. ^
to the sick or buriaLto the dead. Within these broad hrn^ a
community is entitled to protect itself from its own backshdmg
IBipj UOAO ‘pueuiap os gt'^^^eW^^SioS is
and all family considerations must y ' - , . nation
above everything. Human history teaches “
has ever been able through violence to Z
fend its independence against superior vi Anient non-
correct training, this is possible only through non-violent
-co-operation. . t+ ic Pssen-
Non-violence is not a mere negative present
tiaUy a constructive contribution to world J P ^
structure society puts a ~
aggregates of private wealth in community naturally
also constitute the j^^ce It is now a common-
favour -violence as a means of de • substance
place that often so-called national in
nothing hut the interests of private . moneyed
foreign lands. And even In local f use
man, the man of property, who ^outs the loudes^f ^ ^
of force for his protection. The a "P j ^iteration in the
national policy will inevitably involve
.social and economic spheres. '
484
NON-VIOLENCE IN PEACE AND WAB
be, without Indian co-operation. And if that co-operation is with-
held, foreign domination is not possible. This is the lesson we
have to burn into our minds, the minds of the masses as w^ell
as of the classes.
It is in this sense wholly true to say that non-co-operation is
a powerful weapon for the defence of the country, against an
aggressor. As I have already said, extermination is a thing of
the past. Aggressors aim at exploitation by making the sub-
ject people work for them and for ^eir profit. And work is
co-operation. Non-co-operation will make exploitation impossi-
ble and thus aggression itself tmprofitable. The process of non-
co-operation — we are aware of it — will put our non-\dolence
through 'terrific tests. But if we can stand assaults, torture and
shootings without any retaliation or even an attempt at retalia-
tion from our side and persist in non-co-operation, the struggle
must end in success. Examples of such heroic sufferings are
not wanting: Guru-ka-Bagh morcJios of the Sikhs, the Dhara-
sana episodes, and the behaviour of processionists at innumer-
able places are shining examples of the practice of non-wolence
on a large scale. And the struggle^of Bardoli peasants for re-
lief against excessive" land taxes is a valu<ible lesson in non-
co-operation.
Much is said, in order to -terrify people, of the results of
the use of violence by the imraders and aggressors. But the
thing is obviously overdone. 'I believe in the first place that
human nature, though often bad and vile enough, wiU ultimately
recoil from persistent cruelty and torture and slaughter of non-
resisting non-co-operators. Sufferings cheerhiUy borne 'will melt
the heart of even a savage.
And after all does war — without non-co-operation — really
sustain freedom ? In the first place, national policies based on
force anh violence as instruments of defence lead to a race for
armaments, and that race by itself indubitabl3^ leads to war.
Moreover there is no finality in armaments. The machine mas- '
ters and ultimately overwhelms mankind ; and then what hap-
pens to the vanquished ? Once the army is overthrown and
defeated, people are forced to surrender.
What we have really to show is that poople can act cour-
ageously and suffer hardship and even death without the tem-
porary stimulus, and indeed intoxication, of war. A well-or-
CREED V. POLICY OF NON-VIOLENCE
485
ganized mass movement based on non -violence and non-co-ope-
ration for the noble purpose of winning or retaining national
/independence must raise people, not only young well-built
soldiers but even the old and the infirm and men and women
alikef to greater heights than a bloody war ever can. It is the
hearts of the leaders that doubt and quail, but the heart of the
common people is sound enough.
Non-co-operation with the aggressor and the foreigner is
plain enough. That will obviously involve the non-payment of
taxes,, a refusal to enter his service or do his bidding, a refusal
to work in his mills and factories, and non-resort to his law
courts. But it may become necessary even to non-co-operate
with those of our coimtrymen, our own kith and kin, who flout
the national will and co-operate with the aggressor. The thing
to remember is that our non-co-operation has always to be non-
violent and .will, therefore, never do personal injury to the
opponent. So there should be no interference with the supply
of water to the thirsty or food to the hungry, medical assistance
to the sick or burial .to the dead. Within these broad limits a
community is entitled to protect itself from its own backsliding
Infill TOAa ‘puHuiap os s^sarai^ut oqqnd araqM puy •uajq:}ajq
and all family considerations must yield. National freedom is
above everything. Human history teaches us that no nation
has ever been able through violence to retain freedom and de-
fend its independence against superior violence. Given the
correct training, this is possible only through non-violent non-
“co-operation.
Non-violence is not a mere negative concept. It is essen-
tially a constructive contribution to world politics. The present
structure of society puts a definite premium on violence. Vast
aggregates of private wealth in the hands of individuals' who
also constitute the ruling classes in the community naturally ^
favour violence as a means of defence. It is now a common-
place that often so-called national interests are in substance
nothing but the interests of private capitalists and investors in
foreign lands. And even in local disturbances it is the moneyed
man, the man of property, who shouts the loudest for tEe use
of force for his protection. The adoption of non-violence as a
national policy will inevitably involve a radical alteration in the
social and economic spheres. ^ ‘
486
NON-VIOIiENCE IN PEACE AND WAR
It is obvious that national wealth must be more widely and
equitably diffused and social inequalities must disappear. Every
citizen must have equal opportunities to grow. Much in social-
ism and communism will be found useful and admirable in a
non-violent society, the basic difference being that a believer
in non-violence holds that changes can be brought about by
peaceful persuasion and non-violent methods, whereas those who
profess the other doctrines do not share this faith and think that
violent expropriation is the only course.
A believer in non-violence does not wish to abolish capital-
ism by violence. He wishes the community to avail itself of
the results of individual enterprise, and he takes all sting out
of capitalism when he converts a capitalist into a trustee for the
benefit of the nation. K a capitalist were really to consider
hij.mself a trustee, he would never endeavour to swell his profits
by sweating labour. If his wealth were ultimately to be applied
for the benefit of the community, there would be no incentive
left to enrich oneself by improper and Shylockean methods. He
would, even in the process of earning his profits, genuinely en-
deavour to benefit his fellowmen as widely as possible
The real considerations in a society founded upon non-vio-
lence may well be two-fold. Firstly, we have no outside coim-
tries to exploit, no foreign markets to capture, with the aid of
our armies ; and secondly, there must be profitable employment
for every fit person. I do not think that in a free India the ad-
justment of industries will be beyond the bounds of human in-
genuity. The needs of the hand-spinning industry will have to
be particularly borne in mind, capable as it is of giving employ-
ment to millions of people who would otherwise be wholly with-
out work. In planning an economic programme suited to our
needs we can draw with great profit on the great social experi-
ment in Russia. I personally believe that working on co-opera-
tive lines is the true way to national salvation and to non-vio-
lence also.
, For the propagation of non-violence on sound lines it is
necessary that a picture — at least in broad outline, but distinct
and well-defined, not vague and shadowy— of a weU-planned
non-violent society should be drawn and placed before the pub-
lic. Such a scheme would serve many purposes. It would edu-
cate and make people think, and the plan itself would benefit
487
' CREED V. POLICY OP NON-VIOLENCE
by public discussion and criticism. As it is, people are left in
2ubt and do not know where non-violence will land them and
realize that, like the experiment in Russia, the way to per-
fecting a plan of a non-violent society must be through trial and
error. But basic principles must be settled and (^s ^ ^
ble) precisely stated, and outlines well “ks
wala has recently made attempts in that
pubhshed in newspapers and magazines were both thoughtful
and thought-provoking.
I dare say that adequate material for drawing up a preli-
minary outline as a basis of discussion for
can be found in the writings of Gandhi]i spread over a perm^
of 40 years. Valuable hints can also be gamed from ^
other eminent writers. Communist
Of non-violence and
The political and economical people^
must be broad-based on the conscious wi i^jj^jj^ated then
whole. If force as a dominating , ig the pre-
cheerful and willing obedience to the na
requisite to any durable
non-violent resistance to an aggr s , „ . rf national free-
country and prize their national freedom
dom merely means for a vast majori^ °t, nf want and hunger,
care-worn existence with ever-presen e ^ readiness
then it will not be surprising if '*^^ore is order of things
to offer non-violent resistance and to die for an order
which has done so little for the ^ communal
In a non-violent State there s hiehest rules of
questions or any minority problems. e political policy
LraUty and ethics become the h^^nil the
and administrative action and nomvio ence bickerings
foundation of national life, then there ";\^^Vwe ^re now-
and rivalries and struggle for power with which w _
adays so familiar. j d- tn cCase to
Ibe aim. it is said, of all good blcomo
govern, for the State to fade away genuiue non-
classless. These aims can only be
\
488
NON-yiOLENCE IN P^CE AND WAR
violence. Government will be truly the government. by consent.
Problems of poverty and social amelioration confront all com-
munities and require similar treatment. It is the fear that^ma-
jorities will resort to the use of force and violence which poisons
the air. The moment non-violence becomes the instrument of
national policy the majority will have no sanction at its back
other than the willing consent of the minority, and iE it wishes
to rule (if rule it, can be called at all), it can only do so by
winning the confidence and disarming all suspicion of the
minorities. Indeed in a fully non-^nolent society there are no
minorities, for all are one people.
The conclusion, in my view, is that in our present environ-
ment non-violence can only succeed as a creed and nothing else.
Just as Sonnet Russia made a deliberate attempt to alter the
whole structure of society and to modify all the current and
accepted notions of human nature by conscious State effort,
similarty those who believe in non-violence and non-co-opera-
tion as the future hope of humanity must acquire power in the
body politic in non-violent ways, and then endeavour to make
non-violence the only essential instnnnent of pur national
policy. I personally think that the ideal of non-violence is not
unrealizable. On the contrary I think that it can be reached,
and that humanity, after the experience of the horrors of two
world wars in the course of a quarter of a century, will willingly
strive after it. But to attain that goal we shall have to educate
public opinion in its favour, more particularly by radically
planning the whole field of education on the basis of non-vio- "
lence. We must begin with the child, and mould the mind of
the coming generation accordingly.
So far non-violence (aliiTusa) has been practised to regulate
men’s personal lives, and therefore one life, well-lived accord-
ing to the principles of ahimsa^ has influenced many others.
But the sphere of influence has been limited to the region of
private and personal affairs. Unfortunately, during thousands
of years, mankind has been taught that private life and national
life are things apart, governed by totally different principles.
Gandhiji teaches us that there is no such distinction. That
lesson can only be learnt by the people as a whole, if those in
charge of national affairs first learn it themselves and then en-
deavour to impart it to others. I fear we have not done our
CREED V. POLICY OP NON-VIOLENCE 489
duty by the people. We have doubted and hesitated ourselves.
How then can we blame the people ? Let Congressmen first be
firm believers themselves, give a little further time to the people
in general, and then put them to the test.
K. N. KATJU
Harijan, 26-4-1942
INDEX
Abu Bakr, 191
Abyssinia, 110-1, 129, 143, 104, 108
Adajania, Sorabji, 19
Adultery, 377
Adult suffrage, 469
Afghanistan, 4-9, 12-^ 17-8, 104, 259,
424, 467
Afghans, Sec Afghanistan
Africa, 30, 49, 91, 192-5, 221, 253, 357,
381, 426
— ^freedom of 409
— ^possession of 399, 400
— South, 19, 24, 49, 128, 132, 153,
159, 102, 171, 174, 192-3, 195-6,
202, 231, 269, 280, 289, 373, 392,
396, 399, 404, 407, 411, 418, 423,
424
Agriculture, 17, 163, 311 '
Ahimsa, Set Non-violence
Aiyar, Sivaswami, 424
A'jmal lOian, Hakim, 50, 52, 137 .
Alexander, 273
^ Alexander, H. G., 365
All Brothers, 10, 16, 258
Ali Slahomed, 6, 13, 258, 411
All Shaukat, 12, 288, 309
All India Congress Committee (AXC.C.),
312, 336, 345, 356, 359, 448, 458-61,
470-1, 474-5, 478
All India Spinners’ Association (A J.S.A.)
370
Allies, 230, 233, 237-8, 250, 256, 267,
270, 374, 406, 40&, 414-5, 434, 437
Amanulla lOian, 258
America, 101-2, 264, 2G9, 401, 413, 414
— ^armaments 66-7, 92-3
— Britain, 417, 438, 472
— capitalism, 269
— China, Cl-2, 64
— Church, 63
— conscientious objectors, 422
— Congress, 472
— defence method, 441
— democracy, 197-8
— ^Denmark, 62
— disarmament, 472
— exploitation of other races, 34
— France, 89
— Gandhiji, See Gandhiji
— gangsters, 164-5
—Germany, 161, 172, 201, 207-8
—India, 31-2, 35, 101-4, 414-5
— Japan, 62-3
JCAYS, 172
— Kellogg Pact, 89, 92
— last war, 89
— amasses, 29 ‘ ;
— military training, 38
— missionaries, 64-5
— ^moral rearmament, 208-11
—Negroes, 115-G, 127-8, 269
— non-violence, 152, 156, 472
— ^peace, 472 .
' — ^President’s appeal to Hitler, 212
— press, 427
^AThites, 115
Anarchy, 274, 324, 358, 421, 456, 470
Anasakti yoga, 123
Andrews, C. F., 8, 54, 238, 247, 419-20
Aney, Bapuji, 283
Anti-untouchability, 411
Arabia, 443
Arabs, 159-60, 163, 206, 440, 443-4
Arjuna, 117-9, 120-1, 123, 316, 330
Armaments, 66-7, 92-3, 103-4, 149, 159
199, 234, 237, 257, 265, 305, 328, 424,
429-30, 446, 471
Anns Act, 49
Arnold, Edwin, 177, 407
Ashraf, Dr., 467
Asia, 26, 30, 51-2, 91, 162, 178, 184, 221,
231, 381, 407, 423-4
— dismemberment of, 407
— ^freedom of, 409.
— possession of, 400
Asiatics, See Asia
Assam, 395
Atnia, 169
Australia, 146, 202, 422, 464
Austria, 21, 164, 422, 437
Austrians, See Austria
Atiiohiography (by Gandhiji), 68
Axis power, 400, 408
Azad, Abul Kalam, 136, 310, 313, 319,
395, 455, 463
Bajaj, Jamnalal, 98, 32G
Baker, CoL, 20
Ballou, 426
Bambatta, 195
Banerjee, R. C., 18
Banerjee, Suresh, 98, 469
Banker, S. G., 98
Bantus, 193
Bapu, See Gandhiji
Bardoli struggle, 54G
Bartlett, P., 305
490
INDEX
491
Baumgarten, 48, 55
Belgium, 48, 55
Benes, Dr., "154
Bengal, 268, 464
J —East, 401
Bhagvadgita, See Gita
Bharatanandji, 338
Bible, 118, 123, 160, 163, 176, 179, 192
Bidder, Anna, 365
Boers, 419
Boer War, 1, 22-4, 73, 100, 188-90, 357,
416
Bolshevism, 26-7, 47, 426
Borah, 89, 93
Bo^e Brothers, 136
Bose, J. C., 419
Bose, Suhhas, 468
Boycott, 418, 425
Bravery, Cl, 78-9, 94, 131, 137, 151, 154,
265, 270, 273, 281, 298, 305, 334,
335, 349, 357-8, 435, 464
Brayshaw, W. M., 365
Briand, 89 ^
Britain, 19, 49, 202, 319, 373, 381, 400-1,
408-10, 413-4
> — and Abyssinia, 220
— and Afghanistan, 259
— and America, 417, 438
— and China, 65
— and compulsory military trammg,
38-9
— armaments of, 66-7
— armed dictatorship of, 161
—bullet of, 11, 163
T-colonies of, 223-4 ^
— Congress, See Congress
— conscientious objectors, 359
— conscription, 48
— control, 480
— Czechoslovakia, 149, 151-2
—democracy, 198, 220, 222, 224, 238-9
— Eire, 47
—English, 160
— Fascism, 222, 438
. —France, 149, 438 ^ ^
— Gandhiji, 80, 102, *188, 213, 215-7,
240, 247, 256, 268, 293-6, 314-5,
347-8, 417,422, 428, 455, 464, 471-^,
478
— Germany, 149, 160-1, 172, 176, 200,
207-8, 256, 281, 320, 340, 348, 357
—Hitler, 281, 317, 357
— humanity, service of, 87
— hunting, 47
— ^Imperialism, 88, 215, 217, 220, 222,
235, 239, 249, 257, 267, 351, 409,
- 473 ^
— ^India, 2, 6, 14-5, 19, 31-2, 47, 53,
56, 71, 81-3, 87-8, 100, 102-4, 107,
110, 133, 130, 138, 150, 197, 215,
220, 224, 236,238, 249, 256-8, 262,
207, 268-9, 279, 281, 295-6, 3a9,
301, 418, 430-1, 451, 458-60, 465
Britain interests, 400
--Italy, 110-1, 149, 281, 348
^ews, 163, 172, 200
— Kellogg Pact, 89-91
— ^League of Nations, 53, 111, 418
— Manchuria, 220
— missionaries, 65 f
— moral rearmament, 208-9
— ^Mussolini, 281, 317
— Nazism, 280-1, 307
^new world order, 221-2
— non-violence, See Non-violence
— no-war movement, 117, 143-4
— Opium War, 47
— outside criticism, 167
— ^Palestine, 163
— ^Ponsonby action, 431
. — possession, 400
— ^power, 402, 404, 408
— ruling classes, 438
— ^Russia, 101-3
— small nationalities, 280
— statesman, 400
— supremacy, 402
— ^Tory Party, 438
— ^troops, 400
^ — unemployment, 423
m m S3..40, M,
296 _
IIwS,^^esent! 160-1, 219, 221-3, ^7,
270, 272, 280-2, 284^, 317, m
347, 356-7, 359-60, 464-5, 472-3
, — ^war resisters, 432'
—wars, 80-1, 88, 428, 431
Zworfd Wa^,^(1914-18), 21, 23, 39, 69,
fwf 232,' 282f 294, t"'. 4^:
428, 430 / ^
British 303-5, 317,
^“’343^ 364, 375, ’398-400, 408,
Brotherhood,' 37, 42, 64, 311
. — evacuation, 389
Bushido, 425
Buxton, C. 210
Calcutta, 391, 404
California, 101-2
Canada, 295, 422, 464
Cannibiism, 122, 310
Cantlie, Dr., 20
Capital Punishment, 20
492
INDEX
Capitalism, 30-1, 101, 269, 373, 421,
430, 439 \
Carbiollet, 51
Carlyle, 339
Catchpool, C., 249
Central Powers, 423
— responsible government, 467
Ceresole, Pierre, lOG-7
Ceylon, ITS
Chamberlain, 151, 214-5, 250, 438
ChnmparaQj 245
Charkha, See Spinning wheel
Charkha Sangh, 288
Chattopadhyaya, Kamaladevi, 232-3
Chelmsford, Lord, 25
Chenghis Khan, 129
Chiang Kai-shek, 404, 424
Chiang Kai-shek, Madam, 407
China, 67, 183, 404-7
— aggression, 408
— ^America, See America ^
— ^awakening, 102
— ^boycott, 418 >
— Britain, See Britain
— Christian powers, 46
— Colony, 404
— defence, 408 v
— Gandhiji, 147-8, 184, 187-8, 340
— Germany, 46
— Imperialism, 424
—India, 17, 39, 177, 186, 267-8, 404
— Japan, 148, 151, 173-4, 177-8, 181-6,
189-92, 263,441
— ^militarism, 424, 426
— ^non-\iolence, See Kon-\dolence
— ^pacifism, 424
—peace, 148
— ^philosophy, 425
— strikes, 418
— struggle, 404
— ^war, 222, 424
— world, 424
Chinese, Sec China
Choithram, Dr., 251
Christ, Jesus, 41, 64, 117, 122, 132, 167,.
170, 179-81, 191, 195, 357, 371, 420,
422^424 441
Christianity, 29, 46, 64-6, 116\7, 144,
159. 165, 194, 420, 423, 425-6,
Christians, 52, 116-7, 159, 161-2, 171,
176, 179, 181, 183, 192-3, 195. 322,
347, 356, 380, 463, 469, 474
Christian teaching, 381
Church, 118 \
CKril disobedience. See Civil resistance
Chul liberties, 465
Civil resistance, 2, 70, 1C3, 138-9, 161,
231, 250, 270, 291, 300, 344, 348, 350-2,
366, 373, 397, 448, 467-8, 470-1.
475-6
Civil services, 545
Civilization, 46, 54, 102, 1G9, 418, 434,
437-9, 441
Collective security, 220, 435
Columbus, 479
Communal Decision, 255
S^ommunal harmony. See Communal
imity
Communal pact, 144, 254
Communal peace, 110, 133, 470
Communal riots, 133-S, 142, 144, 164,
239, 246-7, 251, 262-3, 276-7, 284,
301-2, 312-3, 324, 331, 344-5, 371,
448, 453
Communal unity, 103, 110, 112, 140,
200, 254, 255, 269, 332, 351, 355, 411,
439
Communalism, 58, 251, 261
Communism (Communists), 436, 438,
467
Communist manifesto, 487
Congress, 366-7
— All India Congress Committee
(A.I.C.C.) See All India Congress
Committee
—Allies, 237-8
— America, Sec America
— ^Amritsar, 25
— armed defence, 236, 279, 296, 309,
331, 336
— army, 279, 312 ^
— ^Bardoli decision, 448
— ^Bombay, 449
— Bombay resolution 345, 347-8,
354-5, 461, 466, 471, 474-6
— ^Britahi, 224, 239, 240, 250, 256,
268-9, 279, 286, 314-5, 361, 414,
458,462-5,471-3 ^
— British, Sec — British rule ^
— British rule, 133, 136, 139, 141, 142,
224, 231, 268, 346-7, 351, 452-4,
— Christians, 356, 474
— civil disobedience (resistance), 344,
449^50, 471
— claim, 473
— constructive programme, 97
— co-operation, 469
— corruption, ^49
—creed, 59, 141, 150, 153, 236, 288,
291, 315, 332, 343, 353, 361, 449,
451, 453, 471
— Czechoslovakia, 149-50, 454
— dacoities, 331, 371-3
— defence, 2S5
— ^Delhi resolution, 2 86 -8, 312,-3,
351, 354, 45S-9, 474 /
— demand, 250, 256, 286, 359, 445,
466, 469, 476
. — direct action, 473
— discipline, 32^, 447, 470-1, 478
— ^Englishmen, See British rule
' — existence, 471, 474
— faith, 274, 301, 450, 452
— ^Fascism, 218, 474
— foreign invasion, 236, 274-7, 279,
309, 330-1
INDEX
493
Congress-France, 225
—fraud, 239
— freedom, 458, 473
< — Gaudhiji, See Gandhi ji
— goal, 4^-1
—God, 280
— goondaism, See hooliganism
— Government, 141, 210, 213, 235,
242, 287, 331, 344, 848, 301, 445,
447, 451-2, 454, 458-9, 469
— Governments, 199, 210, 218, 251,
333
— grain dealer, 369
— greatest crisis, 460
—growth, 133, 136, 448
— ^Haripura, 133, 130
— Hindus, 356, 474
— history, 460, 474
— ^hooliganism ,58-60, 230, 324
— ^hostility to, 322
— ^humanity, 279
— ^independence, 31G, 325, 349, 446,
450, 465-6, 473
—India, 80, 133, 234, 237, 279, 312,
355, 451, 454, 462
— ^indiscipline, 239, 353, 468
• — internal anarchy (disorders, disturb-
ances), 274-6, 279, 309, 331-2, 337
— Je\\'S, 474
—Khan, Abdul Gaffar, 297-8
— ^leaders, 310, 395
— ^League of Nations, 52
— ^legislators, 141 '
— masses, 268, 474-5
— material help, 815
— ^military budget, 237
— ^military unit, 366
— ministers (ministries), 135, 139, 141,
164, 244, 262, 325, 451-2, 454-5
— amoral authority. See — ^moral force
— ^moral co-operation, 454
— ^moral force, 52, 141
> — ^moral hold, (inf-uence), 268
— ^moral reservoir, 315
— ^moral, support, 240, 250, 25(TJ 267,
286, 314-6
— ^Muslim League, 332, 355
— ^Muslims, 239, 355, 474
‘ — national spirit, 463-4
— Nazism, 218, 361
— Nehru, Jawaharlal, 348, 461 ^
— non-commimal, 350
— non-Congressmen, 356, 451, 463-4^^
470
’ — non-co-operation, 231,256,268, 466
— non-embarrassment, 473, 476
—non-violence, 58-61, 83, 85, 133-4,
138-40, 144, 156, 158, 165, 193,
109,210, 224, 227-8,230-1, 234-8,
240-1, 243-5, 252-3, 261-2, 267-8,
274-8, 284-91, 308-15, 322-6, 330-2,
334,836, 343-4, 353,446, 449-5a,
459, 465, 469, 471-5
Congress non-’vdolent army, 134, 137-8,
140,142, 285, 453
— non-violent resistance, 459
— office acceptance (holding), 141,450
— organization, 447, 449, 470, 473-4
— ^Parsis, 356, 474
— ^parties, 353
— Patna decision, 448
— ^peace, 85, 144, 150, 238, 250, 454,
460, 472
— ^peaceful rebel, 453, 475
— pledge, 353, 458
— policy, 83, 133, 141-2, 158, 210, 235,
238, 252, 267, 275, 286, 309, 331,
334, 353, 447-8, 453, 457-9, 469, 473
Poona resolution, 314-5, 330, 336,
343, 355, 458-9, 474
— power, 141
— prestige, 141, 275, 31o, 331, 334, SoG
— Princes, 322 ^
— principle, 465
— programme, 457
— ^provinces, 254
— Ramgarh, 455
Ramgarh resolution, 286, 3o2, 44o,
463
—reason, free play of, 449
— resolution of 1920, 468
—riots, 133-4, 136, 139-40, 142, 144,
^, 230, 2^-40, 246, 323-5, 331,
344* . -n
— satyagraha, 352, 4o9
self-defence, 260-1, 336-7, 447
—service of the nation (people), 193,
474
—Sikhs, 356
—Sindh, 336-7
soldiers, advice to, lb-7
— streng^, 275, 474
— Swaraj, 465
—traditions, 352
' — ^truth, 85, 315, 449, 451
— Viceroy, 473
. — ^violence. See Violence
— ^volunteers, 394
—war, 316, 348, 3ol, 373-4, 4C0, 471
341, 354, 458, 461--, 4< ,
. — \Vest, the, 334
ZS’g' committee, Working
Committee,
—world, See World
fl'7-8?°20S 351, 359-Ci:
Conscription, 47,
Constituent Assembij , — >
494 '
INDEX
■Constructive programme (work), 97,
ICO, 134, 244, 291, 331, 341-2, 366,
384, 451, 476
/^ontre la Guerre Nouvelle (De Ligt.) 418
Co-operation, 483-4
Cosmopolitan, The, 116
Cottage industries, See Village industries
Cowardice, 1, 50, 60, 63, 76-7, 94, 105,
109-10, 137, 141v 152, 154, 158, 243,
326, 334-5, 362, 364, 375, 483
Cow-protection, 13
■Crewe, Lord, 20
Criminal assaults, 376-9
— authorities, 379
— ^man, 378
— ^parents and hxisbands, 378
— ^public opinion, dTT
— ^press, 377
— ^women, 376-9
•Cripps mission, 405
Czechoslovakia, 149-52, 157-8, 162, 164,
168-9, 175, 220, 229, 248, 250, 273,
433, 438, 444, 454
Czechs, See Czechoslovakia
Dacoits, 371-3, 384, 387
Daily VTorker, The, 465
Daladier, 151
JDanes, See Denmark
Daniel, 132,
Danzig, 216, 232,
Dasgupta, S. C., 98
Datta, Dr., 424
Davis, R., 365
Defence, 1, 10, 11, 14, 92-4, 143, 230
235-6, 238, 246-7, 258, 260-1, 285, 296,
297, 306, 323,' 416-27, 429-30, 441,
446-7
De Jong., A., 417
De Ligt, B., 73, 86, 416
Democracy, 23, SO. 37, 96, 151, 159, 161,
168, 197-9, 202-4, 208, 219-23, 230,
233, 238-9, 268-70, 280, 292, 342, 357,
363, 387, 435-6, 464-5, 473
Democratic Powers, See Democracy
Denmark, 46-9, 54-5, 62, 267
Desai, Mahadev, 98, 169, 207, 337
Deshpande, Gangadharrao, 98
De Valera, 21 i
Dhanush Takli, 370
Dharasana, 484
Dictators, See Dictatorship
Dictatorship, 152, 161, 172, 175, 199,
430, 433, 436
Die Emporung Asiens (C. Rosz), 426
Direct action, 331, 473
Disarmament, 28, 44, 81, 85, 89, 90,
108, 111, 116, 158, 176, 334, 459, 472
Doctrine of the sword, See Non-violence,
and Violence
Dominion Status, 91, 100, 238, 428, '
430-1, 464
Doukhobors, 258
Druses, 50-1
Durban, 413
Duryodhana, 316
Dutch, 319
Dyer, 1-2, 39-40, 43, 96, 244
Dyerism, 52, 61
East, The, 33, 102, 104, 232, 424
East India Cotton Association, 400
Eaton, H., 101
Edison, 66
Education, 90-2, 96, 107, 184, 195-6
226, 270, 319-20, 439
Egypt, 202, 443
Einstein, 106
Elliot Smith, G., 435
England, See Britain /
English-educated middle classes, 463
Englishmen, 21-2, 383
— administrators, 22-3, 112, 162
— arms, 259 .
— ^blackest crime, 28, 49
— bravery, 259, 281, 459, 464
— colour prejudice, 263
— Congress, See Congress
— conscientious objectors, 478
— endurance, 459
— faith in, 21
— fear of, 1, 10
— fearlessness, 464
— freedom of speech, 463
— Gandhi ji. See Gandhiji
— Imperi^ism, 112
—India, 1-7, 13-6, 112, 135-6, 138,
236, 259, 348, 466-7
— Indians, 19, ^1, 270
— insularity, 263
— Nazism, 361
— Nehru, Jawaharlal, 223
— non-\dolence. See Non- violence
— ^pacifists, 143-4
— soldiers, 112
— South Africa, 24
— traders, 112
— ^tutors of the world, 42, 45
- — war, 296
—war, last (1914-18), 21-2, 25, 39
< — war, present, 36, 41
- — ^Zulus, 1, 21 ^
Euclid, 45, 131, 292, 339
Europe, 221, 321, 424, 438, 443
— aggression, 68
— amis, 49
—Asia, 178
— ^best mind, 49
— breakdown, 55
— civilization, 40, 54
— defence method, 441
— democracy, 221, 292
— disarmament, 44, 158
■ — disease, 30
—-excesses, 49
— Gandhiji, See Gandhiji
INDEX
495
^Europe — exploitatJon, Z2Z
— federation, 397
— j^rcat pov/cr?, See Great powers
— homo eapierifif 40
—India, a, 2&-S0, 49, 349, 243, S25
— inhumanity, 473
— ^Kaiser, the, 54
— Kellogg Pact, 89-92
— masse$j, 29-Sl
— moral stature, 275
— morals, 48
— ^Napoleon, 82
— nations, 45-7, 54-5, 473
— non-violence, $See Non-violence
—peace, 83, 88, 347, 149, 352, 454
— pcoj^ile, 80
— ^political power, 29
— ^politics, 349, 1C5, 1C8
— present condition, 57
— press, 410, 427
— small nationalities, 149, 352, 357,
281,450
— stanfJard, 48
* — Suites, 50
— Sv/araj, 8<T
—terrorism, 08
— ^violence, See Violence
—war, 155, 197, 218, 220, 488-5
— war, present, 217-8, 220, 221-8,
278-4, 283-2, 848, 850, 445, 455
— war resistance, 49, 78, 82, 80-8
— ^yoiith, 40-1, 55
EuTcq)cam, See Europe
Kvacnation, 885-0
— for military, 408
Kvaewees, 884-5
Evolution, 00
Experiments with Truth (By Gandhiji)388
Exodus 888-5
- Tascism (Fascistfi), 177, 198, 202-8, 204,
218, 221-2, 209, 434, 420, 485,480,
488, 474-5
Pasting, 411-2
Pear, 888
P’earlessncss, 840. 404
Pedenation, 198, 239
PelJowsh/p of yteconciliaiwn, 388, 390
Fisher, Bishop, 418
Pood-stntt, saving, 808
VoTcc, See Brute force
Porciblc resistance, 205
Ford, Henry, 101
Eoreijin A f fairs, 424
I'orgivencss, 1-2
Earmard, 429
Vorvrard Block, 407
France, 481
— America, 89
— Britain, 149, 488
—colonics, 232
— Congress, 224
— Conscription, 98
France — Czcchoslov’akia, 149, 351-2
— democracy, 399
— Bnises, 51
—fall, 272-8
— French, 51, 82, 360
— ^French Congo, 51
— Gandhiji, See Gandhiji
— Germany, 58, 149, 302, 198, 201
— hunting, 47
— imperialist, 215
— India, 15, 50
— Jews, ICO
— League of Nations, 52, 58
— motto, 58
— non-violence. See Non-violence
—Riffs, 53
— Syria, 50, 51, 58
— war, last, 60
— v/ar, present, 214, 215-0, 210
207, 270, 272, 278, 445
Franco, 151
Francois d’Assjssi, 424
Franklin, 444
Freedom, 225, 272, 800, 847, 850-3, 358,
850, 360, 428, 483, 487, 445-6, 458-9,
468, 407, 470, 488
Freedom of action, 473, 473
Freedom of pen, 858
Freedom of speech, 850-1, 858, 859, 860,
446, 460-7, 471, 473
French Congo, 51
FronticT, (N.W.F.i lO-l, 89, 107, 297,
385, 454, 464-5
Fry, A. Ruth, 805
Oad^ Danskee Magasin, 40
Gandhi-Irwdn Pact, 402
Gandhi Seva Sangh, 185, 242-8, 244,
288, 452
Gandhiji, 20, 29, 40, 118-7, 127-9, 185
148, 140-8, 109-72, 174, 377-8, 181-4,
380-8, 390-5, 209-30, 212-8, 217, 228-4,
228-9, 288, 241-2, 244, 245, 250, 288,
293, 832, 834, 822-8, 825, 327, 829-80,
387-8, 845-6, 378, 470, 480-1, 488, 487
— absolution, 275, 287, 341, 855,445-7
450-7
— Abyssinia, 229, 250
— advice, 450
— ^Afghanistan, 0-9, 12-4, 258-9
y — age, 358
— ahimsa, Sec — non-violence
— AH Brothers, 255, 259
— Allies, the, 280, 288, 288, 250, 250
— ambition, 849
—America, 20, 31-8, 40, 330, 294,
471-2
— Andrews, C. F., 419-20
— Ancy, Bapuji, 288
— armament, 827
- — assault on, 1
— Autobiography, 384
— Banerjee, Suresh# 409
496
INDEX
Gandhi ji — ^beliefs, 439
— ^blessings, 46S
— ^bodj’, 352
—Boer War, 1, 22, 24, 73, 100, ISS,
416
— Bombay^ resolution, 346, 347, 461,
474, 47S
—Britain, SI, 88, 101, 18S, 213, 215 7,
240, 247. -256, 26S, 293, 295-6,
314-5, 320, 347-S, 417, 423, 428-9,
456, 463, 471-4.
— British people, «5ec-Britons
—Britons, 2S0-2, 293-5, 303, 304-5,
317, 320-1, 347-S, 364-5
— capacity for research, 290
— captain, 478-9
— Central Powers. 419
— chief work, 246
— China, See China
— Christ, Jesus, 181
— citizen of the Enipire, 22, 49, 71, 2S2
— ci\di death, SS "
— civil disobedience (resistance), 231,
300, 350, 352, 44S, 470, 475-6
— colleagues (comrades, co-workers),
231, 236, 286, 291, 300, 312, 452,
469
— Columbus, 478-9
— communal unity, 255, 439
— confession, 355
—Congress, 139-41, 210-1, 213,
227, 228, 230-1, 235,250, 268,275-8,
283-4, 286-7, 290-1, 296, 300,
312-4, 324, 345-56, 359-00, 368-73,
445, 466, 474-6*
— conscience, 301, 456
— constructive programme, 331
— Czechoslovakia, 151-2, 157-S, 229,
250, 433
— ^Dandi March, 231, 452
— day-dreams, 34§', 456
— Delhi resolution, 459, 474
— democracy, 269-70
— detachment, 449
— dream of life, 2C3
— ^East, the, 33
— eldest SOD, 1
— ending a calf’s life, 131
— Enghmd, See Britain
— error, 355
—Europe, 26, 31, 40-1, 46, 100, 147,
165, 168, 420, 434, 456
— failures, 291
—faith, 3, 14, 112, 115, 127, 130-2,
139, 15S, 170, 176, ISl, 212, 214,
231, 235, 237, 241, 248, 251, 262,
2G5-G, 275-6, 283, 286, 300, 30G,
321, 304, 437, 461
— ^fascism, 414
—fasts, 126, 170
— fear, 461
— France, 214-6
Gandhiji — freedom, 341, 450, 456
— general (generalship), ICS, 239, 326.
351, 462
— Generalissimo, 455
— Germany, 26, 40, 165-6, 216
—Gita, 120, 123-4. 348
— God and, 36, 53, 77, 127, 131, 187,
212-4, 229-30, 251, 263, 270, 275,
282, 290-1, 294, 321, 326, 340,
357, 449, 457, 462
— gospel, 37
— Government, 24-5, 73, 79, 230, 2S7,
300, 350, 352, 359, 364, 475
— great powers, 157-9
— greatest responsibility, 4Gl
— growth. 352, 461
— guidance, 452, 459
— gttru, 467
— heart, 462
— ^helplessness, 77^.246, 26S
— ^Himalayan blunder, 291
— Hinduism, 124
— ^Hindus, 463
— HiUer, 214, 296
— ^hope, 199, 307, 455
— ^humanity, ser\dce of, 348, 420, 431
— importance, 476
— impatience, 452-3, 456
— imperfections, 2S2, 2S9-90, 292
— imperialism, 422
— imprisonment, 352
— in jail, 182, 187, 351
— incapacity, 24, 28
— ^inconsistency, 228, 472
— India, (love, pride for), 3, SS, 171,
241
— India, work in, 2, 26, 29-30,32-7,41,
87, 100, 102-3, 127, 147, 153, 15S,
16S, 200, 271, 279, SC5, 320, 346,
S4S, 418-9, 425-6, 431, 439, 45S-9,
468-9
— ^Indian experiment. See India, work
in
— individuality, 349
— ^industrialism, 425
\ — dinner nature, 444
— ^‘inscrutability'’, 229
— instinct, 306
— intellect, 462
— iron will, 461
—Italy, 348
— Jews, 159-GO, 165, 167-9, 172-3, 179,
205-6, 320, 440-5
— ^khadi, 97-6, 439
— Kheda, 26S
— KhiLafat, 206, 445
— ^labour strike, 409
— Bajpatrai, Bala, 13
—leadership, 37, 291, 319, 353, 451,
457-8
—liberty, 349
index
497
GandhijMimitations, 27, 37, 40, 126, 132,
156,213, 229. 821,351
— limited powers, 24G
— ^littleness 40
— ^loftiness, 445
— ^magnetism, 263
— man of religion, 170-1, 420
— ^means, 4 02
— ^message, 26, 40, 116, 153, 178, 184,
195, 348, 364, 470
-—method, 296, 319, 441
— military training, 424-6
— ^mind, workings of, 351-2
— ministers, 451, 453
—mission, 35, 147, 211, 270, 282, 296,
352, 423, 426, 469
— ^moral co-operation, 455
—moral support, 314-6
— ^mother, 171
— ^Munshi, K. M., 324
—Muslims, 445, 470-1
— Nazism, 414
— Negroes, 116, 194-5
■ — Nehru, Jawaharlal, 277, 461
— non-co-operation, 107
— non-embarrassment policy of, 347,
-^359-62, 462, 466, 471, 476 ^
— npn-violence, 2, 9, 21-2, 24, 27-8,
41-2, 49-50, 71, 74-7, 81, 87,
99-100, 109, 111, 115, 119, 124-5,
126-8,129-32,135-6, 139-40, 143-4,
156-8, 169, 172, 174-5, 178-81,
184, 186, 189, 199-201, 205,
210-1, 216-7, 228-31, 234, 237-9,
241 , 245, 247-51 , 259, 262-6,
269, 274-5, 282, 289-92, 296, 299-
301, 310, 312-3, 320-8,
329-30, 333, 341-3, 347, 353-4,
362-4, 410, 421-7, 445-57 468,
478
— ^non-violent army, 325-6
— non-violent rebel, 71
— not a coward, 105, 152, 158, 166
— ^not a recluse, 327
— not a visionary, 2, 351
— not a well-read man, 127
— not helpless, 1
—Pant, G* B., 324
•— l^arsis 470
— ^Patel, Sardar Vallabhbhai, 284,
323
— patience, 433
—peace, 81-2, 147, 250, 849, 428
— ^personality, 449
—Poland, 217, 250
— ^politically 'without a peer, 401
— ^politics, 170-1
— ^Poona resolution, 474
— power of growiih, 290
— ^practical idealist, 2
— practical man, 3
—prayer, 150, 170, 212, 217, 251, 25G,
457, 461
N. V.— 32
Gandhiji-principle, 456, 461
— programme, 489
— ^Rafagopalachari, C.,284, 286-7,328,
354
— ^religion of, 3, 241
— ^resourcefulness, 352
— ^result, attitude to, 462
— ^Rowlatt Act, 25
— Russia, 26, 78
— salvation, 463
— satyagraha, 153, 216 347, 349, 854,
441
— search, 456
— secret methods, 259
— self-expression, 457
— self-suppression, 463
— Sermon on the Mount, 420
— Sevagram, work at, 131, 270, 327,
352
— shoe-making, 290
— silence, 170, 213, 289, 457
— social reformer, 170
—soul, 452, 455, 461
— South Africa, 24, 49, 128, 132, 153,
159, 171, 174, 195-6, 231, 280,
289, 418
— Spain, 250
— spiritual gospel, 198
— spiritual greatness, 461
— spiritual prophet and leader, 248
- — stewardship, 353
— still small voice, 52, 57, 231
— strength, 352, 461
— striving for perfection, 116
— study of geometry, 113
— successes, 291
— Swaraj, 466
— talents, 291 »
— ^teacher, true, 290
— Tolstoy, 420
— travail, 462
— ^trial, 3, 241
—truth, 27, 132, 135, 206, 228, 282,
324, 347, 404, 449
— truth and non-violence, 40-1, 68,
450
— unconditional support, 223, 240-1,
324-5, 455, 462
— universal love, 282
— ^unseen power, 187
— ^untouchahility, 126, 171
—Viceroy, 213, 215, 217, 231, 240,
282, 345-6, 350, 351, 359-61, 364,
424, 465, 467, 469-70, 475
— ^violence, 1, 7, 250, 423, 429
— virtue, 463
—war, last (1914-18), 1, 19-26, 49,
C8-9, 73-5, 106, 125, 188, 229,
267-8, 416, 418
— WSLT, opposition to, 08-72, 74-5,
78-82, 86-8, 161^ 181, 212, 213,
218, 228-9, 240, 349, 357, SGO-l
416-38, 435, 454, 478-9
498
INDEX
Gandhiji-war, present, 210-1, 228-9, 207,
S14, 345-9, 454-5, 462, 405
— war resister, See — war, opposition to
— ^IVardha resolution, 341
— weakness, 100, 220, 355, 433
—West, 33, 36-7, 147, 212, 413-4,
419-20, 423, 425
— ^wife, 174
— ^wisdom, 352
— women, 245, 290
— word, 321 , 323
— ^WorkingCommittee, See — Congress,
—world, 31-3, 35, 37, 212, 248,
305-6, 320, 327, 346, 348-9, 364,
420, 426, 439, 446
— zeal, 300
— ^Zulu Rebellion, ^Revolt), 1, 21-2,
25, 73, 100, 188, 195, 416
Garrison, 420
Germans, See Germany
Germany, 40, 44, 373
— ^aerial bombing, 435
— Allied blockade, 437
— America, See America
— ^armament, 44, 07
— ^Belgium, 48, 55
— Bolshevism, 48
— Britain, See Britain
— China, See China
— colonies, 232
— Communism, 438
— conscientious objectors, 422
— Czechoslovakia, 149-50, 157, 175
— ^Danzig, 216
— ^Denmark, 47, 55
— dictatorship, 152
— ^Empire, 273
— ^France, See France
— Gandhiji See Gandhiji
— great people, 55
— HiUer, 214, 273, 307, 320, 441
—India, 54-5, 106, 228, 203, 266, 295,
458
— ^Italy, 149
—Jews, 159-03, 165-9, 172, 179, 200-1,
205-8, 320, 440-5
— militarism, 55, 170
— minority, 444 .
— ^Nazism, 218, 249, 319-21
— ^non-violence. See Non-violence
— ^Norway, 260-7 ^
— ^Pan-Germanism, 47-8, 55
— ^peace, 55
—Poland, 47, 55, 219, 227, 323, 338
— ^Polish Corridor, 216
— ^Ponsonby action, 431-2
— Quakers, 247, 437
— ^revolution, 438
— Sudetens, 438
— Versailles, treaty of, 203
— violence, See Violence
—war, 320-1, 437
Germany-war, last ri914-18), 21, 25,
49-55, 434, 437
— war, present, 213-6, 233, 270, 307,
320-1, 340, 356-7
- — world, See World
— youth movement, 55, 320-1
Gewalt und Gewalthsigkeit, 426
Gidwani, Shamlal, 362-3
Gita, The, 4, 71-2, 117-8, 120, 123-4,
298, 308, 326, 330
God,
— belief in, 123, 194
— brute force, 214
— Commander, 327
— common to all, 161, 163
— Congress, 279 *
— creation, 117, 137
— Creator of State, 48
— dedication to, 155
— denial of, 27
— direction, 209
— divinity shared by man, 305
—faith in, 29, 77, 117, 119, 145, 147,
161, 168, 191
—fear of, 162, 335
— forsaken by, 164
— fulfilling iKrnself, 454
— Gandhiji and. See Gandhiji
— grace of, 145
— gratitude to, 155
—help, 77, 246, 271, 294, 353, 469
— heritage given by, 165
— ^human life, 43
— imperial court, 357
— infallible Guide, 327
— Innermost, 462
— instruments of, 191, 326
— intervention of, 455
—Law of, 197, 251
— leadership, 209
— life designed by, 42
— flight given by, 4
— living, 117, 124, 194
— ^loyalty to, 16
— mercy of, 77
— name of, 347, 463
— near to, 463 ^
— not impotent, 214
—of Love, 117, 119, 168
— of mercy and justice, 11
— omnipresence, 145
— one without a second, 161
— ^peace, 251
— personal, 161
— plans of, 191
— ^power of, 145, 159
—prayer to, 82, 212, 327
— ^presence of, 154
— ^protection from, 64, 187
— purpose of, 295
— ^Hama, 477
— realization^ 137
— ^refuge in, 335
IKDEX
499
God-reign in heaven, 121
— ^reign on earth, 121
— ^result, 298
— search of, 449
— servant of, 153, 297
— shield, 335
— soul of men, 42
— State-made frontiers, 108
— strength, 321
— ^thanks to, 227, 240
— trust in, 11
—Truth, 127, 108, 282, 414
— ^unfailing assistance of, 175
— unseen Power, 52, 187
' — imtouched by everything, 326
— ^upholder of justice, 218
— ^waiting upon, 75
— ^way of, 4
— ^will of, 241
— ^with us, 335
— ^without the eternal cycle, 311
■ — ^world need, 35
Gokhale, G. K., 19
Government, (British), 5-9, 11, 13-5, 17-9
22-3,88-9,41,49, 69, 74, 79, 94, 96,
107, 133, 162, 171, 210, 213, 218,
221-2, 230, 235, 242, 244-5, 246,
250, 251, 259, 264, 271, 278, 282,
284, 288, 294-5, 315, 321, 325, 334,
344, 340, 348, 350, 352, 359-61,
364-5, 370, 384, 389, 391-2, 405,
417-8, 432-3, 445, 448-9, 450-1,
458-9, 460, 405, 469, 473^ 483
Government, Political form of, 36, 41-2,
421
Government of India Act, 198, 199, 218,
464
Grain-dealers, 369
Great Britain, See Britain
Great powers, 110, 149, 157-0, 108, 176,
179, 274
Greenburg, H., 440
^regg, Richard, 118, 291, 433
Gujarat, 285, 288, 302, 314
Gupta, Pashupatinath, 134, 138, 453
Gurkhas, 4-6, 237, 325
Guni-ka-Bagh morcha, 484
Hamdard, 51
Hand-carding, 17 '
Handicrafts, 296, 439
Hand-loom (weaving), 17
Hardinge, Lord, 25
Ilarijan, 125, 127, 134, 153, 197, 200,
205, 207, 242, 248, 274, 284, 300, 314,
320, 328, 340, 362, 392, 433, 435, 480
Uarijanhandhiif 314
Harijans, 126, 439
Harrison, Agatha, 248
Hartog, Philip, 207
Haworth, C. and H., 247 •
Heath, C,, 305
Hijrai, 247, 253-4, 362-3
Himsa, See Violence
Hind Swaraj (Gandhiji), 243
Hinduism, 3, 23, 123-4, 165, 252
Hindu Mahasabha, 259, 261
Hindu-Muslim unity (clashes, riots,
tension), 6, 12, 53, 56, 75-6, 110, 140,
206, 239, 243, 201, 439, 470
Hindus, 6, 11, 13-4, 17-8, 23, 25-6,
50, 53, 75-7, 110, 123-4, 137, 145, 159,
161, 198, 225, 239, 246, 251-2, 254-5,
258-ei, 322, 341, 356, 362-3, 463,
469-70, 474
Hitler, 173, 214-6, 230, 232-3, 243, 244,
267, 272-3, 281, 290, 296, 805, 300-7,
317, 319-21, 351, 373, 438, 441, 456
Hitler Speaks (H. Rauschnigg), 320
Hitlerism, 272-3
Hobhouse, Emily, 189
Hodge, JT. Z., 169
Holmes, Dr. 413
Home Rule, See Swaraj
Howard, E. F., 365
Hsu, P. C., 183, 190
Hudson, J. H., 365
Hiunanity, See Mankind
Imperialism, 21, 88, 103, 112,. 116, 119,
158, 215, 217-23, 234, 239, 247,
249, 257-8, 267, 269, 282, 351-2,
361, 381, 407-8, 418, 421-2, 424,
428, 432, 440, 446, 473-4, 478
Imperialistic nations, 481
Independence, 91, 101, 134, 142, 152,
154, 199, 202, 217, 234, 239, 249-50,
263-5, .275, 279, 287,295-6, 310, 324-5,
347, 349, 430, 450, 452-3, 458,
463, 465, 466-7, 470, 473-4, 470
Independent^ 95
India, 124, 183, 267, 355, 381, 388,
400-1,408,480
— administration, 483
— ^Afghanistan, 4-9, 12-4, 17-8, 104,
258-9^
— aggression, external, See invasion,
foreign
— air force, 87, 425
— America, See America
— anarchy, 359
— ^Arabia, 17
— ^Arabs, 17, 206
— armaments, 237, 257, 424
— arms, 1, 430
—army, 38, 87, 102, 226, 236, 238, 2G3i
323, 325, 425, 429, 446
— aspiration, 330, 463
— autocracy, 359
— ^bondage, 35, 349, 351, 458, 403
— bravery, 334
— ^Britain, See Britain
— ^British rule, See — Britain
—Buddhist, 178
— Burma, 17
500
India^China, Sec China
— civil resistance, 103
— classes, dominant, 429>o0
— clothing, 97
— Columbus, 478-9
— Commander-in-chief, 226-8
— communal unity, 6
— Congress, See Congress
■ — conquerors, 263
— Conscientious objectors, 259-61
— conscription, 257
— Constituent Assembly, 220, 465
— constitution, 197, 199,200, 295, 333,
465
— co-operation, 483-4
— cov’ardice, 1, 104-5, 334
— culture, 195, 263
— Czechoslovakia, 149-50
— decajung nation’, 112
— defence, 8-9, 14, 91, 93-4, 101-4,
150,235-6,258, 2C4, 296, 306, 334,
404, 406, 423-4, 429, 445-6, 481
— Defence Forces, 226-8, 279-80
— defencelessness, 480
— deliverance, 206, 211, 214, 349, 351,
463
— democracy, 219-20, 230, 238, 270,
464, 465
— Denmark, 267
— destiny 111
— disarmed, 28, 81, 150
— dishonour, See — honour
— dissensions, 261, 267
— division, 470
— doctrine of riie svrord, 1-3, 241
— domination, 94, 103, 459
— Dominion, 430
— Dominion Status, 91, 100, 2SS, 464
—East, 104
— economy, 236
— emasculation, 28, 104
— England, See — Britain
— Englishmen, 1, 3, 5, 13-4, 111-2,
231, 236, 263, 282, 350, 466-7
— enslavement. Set slavery
— Europe, 3, 29-30, 35, 48-9, 149,
241, 349
— exploitation, 114, 323, 458-9
— exploited nation, 86, 91, 209, 224,
257
— ^fear, 227
— ^fordgn policy, 15-6
— foreign rule, lOS
— France, 15, 56, 67
—free, 22, 36, 100, 220, 222, 236,
250, 257-8, 264, 288, 310, 342,
428, 445, 458-9, 465
—freedom, 9, 36, 41, 44, 57, 71, 82,
- 85, 87, 91, 94, 103-4, 134, 141, 150,
158, 212, 216-7, 219-20, 224-5,
248, 262, 267, 274, SOS, 348-9,
351, 366, 405, 445, 449, 454, 45S-9,
463, 474
India-future, 471
— Gandhijfs love (pride) for, 3, 88,
171, 241
— Gandhiji’s ivork, Su Gandhiji
— Germany, See Germany
— goal, 428
— Government, 6-11, 13-8, 36, 38-41,
49, 50, 94, 96, 107, 132-3, 218,
221-2, 264, 287, 334, 465
— greatest moral force, 112
— greatness, 53
— GurudTrara, 349, 463
— ^helplessness, 33, 90
— ^heroism, 442
— history, 410, 463
—Hitler, 373
— ^Home Rule, 424
— honour, 1, 14, 227
— hope, 439
— imperialism, 218, 220, 222, 361, S74
— impotence, 36, 52
— independence, 91, 101, 133-4,
142, 217, 235, 239, 248, 249-50,
262-5, 275, 279, 287, 295-6, 324,
347, 349, 458, 460, 463, 465, 467,
470
— independent, 286, 295, 445, 451,
467
— ^inter-migration, 254-5
— ^intemal disorder (disturbances), 285,
331, 446-7, 452
— intonal dissensions, 230
— internal economy, 104
—Italy, 110
— ^inN’iion, foreign, 4-9, l2-4, 17, 22,
103, „122, 202, 220, 235-6, 250,
264-5, 285, 306, 322, 325, 429,
446-7, 452, 467
—Japan, 5, 177-8, 185-6.202,223, 407
— Jews, 443
“ I diadi, 439
— Lancashire, 34
— leaders, 351
— League of Xarions, 428, 430
— liberation, 32, 423
— liberty. See — freedom
— manly, 14
— martial races, 236, 2S5
— mass action, 471-2
— masses, 97, 158, 429, 442, 474-5
— masses of the West, 29, 31
— 3iIesopotamia, 15
— militarization, 421, 424, 427-S
— military defence, 296, 312
— military expenditure, C, 93
— mUitary programme, 95-100
— military training, 257, 423, 426
— mission, 3, 111, 241
— Moghuls, 470
— moral rearmament, 209-10
— moral support, 257, 267
• — movement, 319, 439
— Mussalmans, 25, 263
INDEX
501
India-National Socialism, 319
— national State, 428
— nature, 263
— navy, 87, 425
— ^Nazism, 374, 471
— neighbouring tribes, 6, 10-1
— non-cooperation, 281, 358, 465
— non-violence, 1-3, 9, 22, 28, 57-8,
83, 86-7, 94-5, 100, 103-6, 109-13,
123, 133, 138-9, 146-7, 149-50,
157-8, 167-8, 170, 210-1, 217,
223, 227-9, 234-8, 241, 243,
250, 256-7, 264-8, 271, 273-4,
276-9, 284, 295, 306, 308, 310,
322-3, 325, 334, 341, 343, 358-9,
458, 465, 471, 486
— Norway, 267
— not a military country, 226-8, 238
— not helpless, 1
—one nation, 385
—oppressed Asiatics, 52
— ^partial unemployment, 99
— pauper, 267
-^ace, 57, 85, 91, 95, 219, 228, 250,
323, 349, 361, 383, 416, 460
— peaceful, 258
—Poland, 225-0
— police force, 225-6
— poverty, 7, 90, 99, 331, 470
— power, 2, 30
— prestige, 358
— ^Princes, 287
—prison, vast, 349, 463
— ^Provincial Autonomy, 464
— rebellion, 352
— religions, 135
— ^republic, 408
— ^rulers, 177
— Russia, 6, 101-2
— satyagrcdia, 41-2, 103, 162, 264, 442,
447
— scorched earth, 388-90
— Secretary of State for, 350, 361, 475
— self-defence, 259
‘ — self-determination, 220
— self-government, 102
— self-reliant, 103
— service, 346
— slavery, 358, 454
— soldiers, 4, 6, 8, 16, 96, 228, 258
— soul, 30
— soul force, 36, 238
— South Africa, 24, 162, 193-6, 231,
272, 280
— Spain, 207
— spinning wheel, 103, 201, 449
— spirituality, 3, 5
— spoliation, 82, 97
— States, 221
— strength, 1-3
— strong, 264
—struggle, 109
— students abroad, 319
India-subject nation, 256
—Subjection, 81, 90, 107
— Swadeshi, 5
— Swaraj, See Swaraj
— Syria, 50-3
. —Tibet, 39
— truth, 206
—Turkey, 15, 17
— ^unarmed, 236, 258, 334-5 ,
— imited, 4, 223
— unity, 102-4, 112
— Viceroy, See Viceroy
— ^village industries, 35
— violence, See Violence
— vivisection, 470
—war, 86-93, 148-9, 218-9, 228-9,
264, 295, 352, 400, 417-8, 426,
428, 431, 435, 464
—war, last (1914-18) 21-6, 47, 268
— war tax, 400
—West, 32-3, 37, 91, 94, 102-3,
209, 429
— women, 166-7
—World, 2-3, 32-3, 35-7, 88, 220-1,
228, 232-7, 241, 249, 258, 267,
277, 323, 348, 460, 464
— ^Indian soldiers, not a national
army, 388
Industrialism, 425, 480
Inquiry, The, 61
International Anti-militarist Bureau,
417 •
International Red Cross Society, 107
International Women’s League for Peace
and Liberty, 423
Internationalism, 224, 444
Invaders, 484
Iraq, 225, 443
Insh 444
Islam, 7, 11-2, 25, 165, 202, 252, 298,
445, 470
Israelites, 253
Italians, See Italy \
Italy, 46,, 111-2, 116, 129, 140, 151, 192,
198, 232, 281, 348, 357, 444
Jacob, 115
Jains, 343
Jaiprakash Narain, 351
Jairamdas Doulatram, 98
Jallianwala Bagh, 208
Jamaluddin-al-husaini, Syed, 50
Japan, 67, 183, 383, 398-400, 404-10
— aggression, 407, 415
— America, See America
— Axis powers, 408
— China, 408-9
- — ism, 399
— ^mo^s, 407
• — non-violence, 146
— ^progress, 56, 102
— ^Russia, 50
— soul of, 425
502
INDEX
Japan,-West, 178
— ^world, 408
Java, 319
Jean lyarc, 21
Jeans, Sir James, 412
Jehovah, 161-2
n/ewish jF’roniter, 205-6, 440
JcLvish Tribune, 207
Jews, 48, 159-62, 165-8, 172, 174,
179-81, 200-1, 205-8, 320, 440-5, 469,
475
Jinnah, Quaid-e-A7,am, 855, 370
Jivadaya, 343
Johannesburg, 404
Jones, Stanley, 147
Joseph, George, 95-9
Journal de Geneva, 420
Judas, 422
Jugoslavia, 83
Kagawa, 181-2
Kaiser, 54
Kamatak P, C. C. 394
Katju, Dr., 4S0
Kauravas, 118
Keir Hardie, 426
Kellogg, 89-92
Kellogg Pact, 89-93
Kierala, 398
Khadi (Khaddar), 53, 95-9, 110, 116-7,
433, 439, 449
Khaksars, 468
Khan, Abdul Gaffar, 153, 286, 297-8, 335
Kheda, 268
Kher, Balasaheb, 322, 324-5, 330
Khilafat, 6, 12-4, 17-8, 25, 76, 137,
206, 239, 255,' 445
IChudai iChidmatgars, 154, 297-8
Kingdom of Heaven, 115
Korea, 184
Kou Hou Ming, 427
Krestinsky, 26
Kripalani, J. B., 98
Krishna, 117, 123, 314-6, 330, 362-3
Kruger, 162
Kung, Dr., 148
Labour, 270, 451
Lajpat Rai, Lala, 13
Lakshmidas, 98
Lancashire, 34, 247
Lancet, The', 67
Lansbuty, 143
League of Nations, 41, 51-3, 199, 219,
418,429-30, 443-4
I/Cbanon, 443-4
Levinson, S. O., 89
Lew, T. T., 183
Liberals, 138-9
Liberty, 357, 301, 364, 423-4, 432,
442, 459, 465-7, 476
Liberty of press, 477
Liberty of speech, 463, 466-7, 476-9
Linlithgow, Lord, 293, 360
Lohia, Ram Manohar, 351
London, 407
Lothian, Lord, 198
Love, See Non-violence
Ludendorff, 55
Macdonald, J. R., 417, 432
Machinery, 34, '102, 173, 226, 435
Maginot Line, 236
Mahabharata, 118, 120, 124, 283, 301?
314, 316
Mahomed, 191
Malabar, 472
Malaya States, 178
Manchuria, 164, 220
Mankind, 36, 111, 117, 119, 137, 149,
168, 171-2, 176, 194, 200, 204, 207,
209, 212, 214, 220, 227, 233, 266, 280-1,
297, 307, 311, 334, 340, 348, 361,
420-4, 427-S, 431-2, 436, 443, 446, 465
Manoranjan Babu 260-1
Marriage and Restraint, 42, 45
Claude, Dr. Royden, 3S0-2
Mauritius, 404
Marx, Karl, 179
Marwari Relief Society, 391-3
Mashruwala, Kishorlid, 135, 244, 480, 487
Mays, Dr., 127-8, 131
Meads, 132
Mehta, Dr. Jivxaj, 19
Mehta, Dr- Pranjivandas, 19
Menon, Damodar, 467
Mesopotamia, 35
Migration See Hijrat
Militarism, 55, 179, 326, 424, 426-7,
434 480-1
Mflitary, 133-6, 139, 144, 164, 252, 323,
389, 402, 450-2, 460
— ^budget, 6, 93, 237
' — defence, 296, 312
— mentality, 107
— plans, 400
— preparation, 426
— programme, 94-9, 100
— ser\dce, 106-8, 268, 431-2
—•training, I, 20, 38-9, 73, 79, 93, 236,
246, 423-7
hlinorities, 258, 443-4, 469, 474 '
Missionaries, 169-73, 392, 207
Models of Comparative Prose, 124
Mohammedans, See Muslims
Montagu, E., 170
Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms, 25 _
floral authority, 450
— ^forcc (courage, fibre, strength), 52, 65,
94, 112, 172, 257, 284, SOG, 314,
328
— ^pressure, 466, 476
— ^prestige, 315, SGI
— ^reaTOament, 208-10
— support, 240, 250, 256-7, 207, 314-6
— value, 374
INDEX
503
Moral weakness, 419
Moslems, See Muslims ^
Moss, Ii. B., 169
Mott, Dr., 164, 168-70
MuUer-Lebning, A., 430
Munich, Peace of, 454
Munshi, K. M., 324
Muras, M. S., 183
Muslim Deague, 251, 287, 332, 355,
370
Muslims, 4, 6-7, 10-4, 17-8, 25, 52-3,
76-7, 110, 136-7, 161, 178, 196, 198,
206, 236, 239, 252-4, 258, 261, 298,
302, 322, 343, 347, 363, 445, 451-2,
463-4, 467, 469-70, 474
Mussalmans, See Muslims
Mussolini, 107, 129, 133, 151, 165, 174-5,
232, 281, 317
"My Magazine^ 82
Nag, Kalidas, 146
Naidu, Sarojini, 20
Naoroji Sisters, 98
Napoleon, 82
Nation, 64-5
National freedom, 485
Nationalism, 160, 225, 426, 440
Navajivan, 75
Nazarenes, 83-4
Nazis, iSec Nazism
Nazism, 177, 179, 198, 203-4, 218, 269,
280, 305, 307, 319-21, 361', 373-4, 399,
‘408, 414, 436, 438, 471, 474
Negroes, 115-6, 127-8, 183, 192, 253,
269, 401 „
Nehru Committee (Plan) 100,'- 423, 425,
429
Nehru, Jawaharlal, 98, 182, 210, 223,
234, 277, 310, 348, 395, 402, 404, 461,
460-7
Nehru, Motilal, 326
Nero, 107, 265
Netherlands, 421
New era, 401
New order. 221, 286-7, 349, 374, 38o,
459, 468
New York Times, 92
New Zealand, 464
Newman, Cardinal, 4
News Chronicle, 472
Newton, 2
Niemoeller, 179-80
Nietzsche, 54, 306
Nitohe, Inazo, 424
No-rent campaign, 468
Non-co-operation, 2-5, 7, 9, 14, 7,
19,41, 54, 59, 60, 74, 106-8, 115, 138-9,
147, 197-8, 231, 256, 205, 269-70, -81,
284, 296, 348, 351, 358, 380, 441, 405,
407-8, 480-2, 484-5
Non-resistance, 61-3, 143
Non-violence, 375, 382, 386, 402, 409-12
— absolute, 40-2
Non-violence-Abyssinia, 110-1, 129
— activest force, 105, 113, 129, 139.
143, 172
— administration, 324
— against constituted authority, 284,
297, 300, 322
— aggression, 238, 249, 265, 446
-—Allies, 267
—almost, 323, 337, 341
— alphabet, 299
— ^America, See America
— anarchy, 324
— anger, 329
— animal life, 71, 74, 79, 343, 419
— application, 354
— ^Arabs, 163
— ^Arjuna, 120-1, 330
— arms, 281, 332, 334-5, 362-3
— army, 101, 109, 134, 138, 142, 238,
273-4, 285, 299-300, 312-3, 32o,
453, 456, 468
—art, 236, 271, 308, 481
—at heart, 239, 276, 279, 295, 4/o
— Atman, 335
— attributes of, 311, 375
— axioms, 111-2
— Azad, Abul Kalam, 310
— behaviour, 392
. — ^best field, 299 rf
between individuals, 186-7, 265
— ^between man and man, 44
—Bible, 123, 176
— Bolshevism, 27 I
— ^bravery, Bravery _
—Britain, 111-2, 143-4, 151-2, 157,
296, 305, 320
— British, 263, 280-1
—brute force, violence
—Buddha, 129, 191, 308-9, 371
—Buddhism, 146 » isn
— capacity to generate heat, lou
— caricature, 299
— Champaran, 245
— chaos, 470
— children, 119, 329 -co r ion
—China, 147-8, 172-3, 183-6; 190,
Christ, Jesus, 117, 132, 179-81, 191,
371
—civil disobedience (resistance),--344,
— co^on ground, 350-1, 466, 476
— common people, 2
— communal clashes. See riots
— communism, 487
—complete, 24, 72,
conditions, 119, 120, 468, 470
. — conduct, 392
— Congress, iS’ee Congre^ .
—conscientious objectors, 14, 38, 83-4,
117-8
. — conscious, 137
. — constructive, 139, 197
50i
INDEX
Non-violence — constructive programme,
541-2, S99
— constructive v'ork, 291
— cowardice, 1, 49, 59, 63, 77, 94, 110,
137, 141, 154, 194, 243, 334-5, 362,
364, 418
— co-workers in, 323
—creed, 9, 114, 135, 150, 158,200,204,
237, 275-6, 2S8-9, 315, 353, 391-2,
395-6, 449, 480
— criminal tribes, 328
~ cult, 471
— Czechoslovakia (Czechs), 149-51,
157-S, 162, 175,273
— dacoities, 276, 278-9, 302, 328, 331
— ^Daniel, 132
— death, 455
— defeat. 111, 265
— defence, 10-1, 143, 149-50, 230, 235,
238, 260-1, 271, 274, 278, 297,
306-7, 417, 446-7, 481
— definition, 343
— degrees, 230
— defiberate, 331
— democracy, 151, 159, 199, 200, 203-4,
269-70, 292
— demonstration, 313
— Denmark, 266-7
— dictators, 205
— direct action, 113
—disarmament, 44, 85, 89
—discipline, 130
—discovery, 2, 282
— distortion, 77
— doctrine, 330
— domestic sphere, 292, 299, 300, 322
— Doukhobours, 253
— economics, 30
— education, 488
— effective use, 261
-~efficacj% 235, 262-3, 276, SOI, 482
—effort, 342
— egg-eating, 322
— Einstein, 106-7
—electricity, 113
—elusive in working, 180
— ^England, See — ^Britain
— Englishmen, 112, 231, 280-2, 303,
320
— entire, 41, 44, 58
—ether, 113
—Europe, 29-30, 106, 108, 273-1, 281
— expedient, 59
— experiment, 252, 264-5, 284-5, 291,
303, 306-7, 341, 449, 456
— expression, 450
— factory ci^alization, 243
—failure, 382, 452
—faith, 113, 140, 144-5, 158, 180,
187-8, 191, 194, -205-6. 235, 241,
274-5, 285-8, 291, 298. 301, 303,
310, 313, 371, 394, 406, 434, 449,
470-1, 475
Non-violence — family. See Domestic
sphere
— Fascists, 203
— fasting, 411
—fear, 278-9, 299, 302, 335
— ^first condition, 267
— flower of, 178
— ^for winning freedom, 28, 58, 85,
87, 94, 100, 134, 150, 158, 264,
267, 297, 308-10, 315, 324, 332,
350, 356, 428, 446-7, 458, 465-6,
468-71, 476
— ^force of, 274, 308
— ^foreign invasion, 143, 183-4, 235,
276, 2S4, 306, 317-8,* 320,* 322,
325, 330-1
— ^France, 152, 157, 273
— ^freedom of action, 471
* — ^freedom of speeci, 331, 359, 360,
467, 47f^
— ffeedom to propagate, 473
— fiaiits, 332
— Gandhi Seva Sangh, See Gandhi
Seva Sangh
— Gandhiji, See Gandhiji
— gangsterism, 164-5, 278
—Germany, 179-80, 295-6, 320-1, 323'
—Gita, 117-8, 120, 123-4, 326, 330
— God, faith in, 119, 145, 191, 194,
283, 321, 335
— goondaism. See — ^hooliganism
— Government, 4, 74, 79, 230, 250, 382
— great powers, 157-9
—greatest force, 63, 110, 113-4, 132^
— group, 265
— ^half-baked, 325
—hatred, 263
— ^heroes of, 231
— ^heroism, 189
— ^Hinduism, 3, 123-4, 241
— Hindus, 6, 252, 322, 343, 362-3
— HiUer, 152-3; 168, 174-6, 179-81
273, 296, 305, 320-1, 456
— ^Hohhouse, Emily, 189
— honest endeavour, 300
— ^honour, 122, 152, 335
— ^hooliganism, 58-9, 230, 271, 302
344-5, 452
— human nature, 113, 116, 138, 139,
141,149, 175,267, 296
— Shuman relations (species), 322, 343
— humility, 187
— imperfect, 291, 333
— imperialism, 119
— implications. 111, 118-9, 142, 230,
243, 299-300, 322, 354, 454, 481
— impotence, 240
— imprisonment, 41, 43
— in every walk of life, 2S2, 302
— in thought, word and deed, 58, 103,
120, 137, 140, 256, 288-9, 449
— independence, 142, 250, 265, 275,
316, 453, 474
INDEX
505
-violence-India, See India
— ^India’s freedom, 366
— individual, 2
— infallible weapon, 308
— intellect, 290
— ^intensity, 530
—internal anarchy (disorders), 276-9,
284-5, 309, 322, 331-2
— ^international relations, 28, 41, 4f3-4,
101, 159, 170, 181, 280
— invasion, 481
— invincible, 336
— ^inward growth, 142
— Japan, 147
— Jews, 161-3, 165-6, 167-9, 172, 174,
179, 200-1, 207, 320
—jivadaijn. See — animal life
- — ^justice, 267
— ^Khan, Abdul Gaifar, 153, 286,
297-8, 335
— Khudai Khidmatgars, 297
—Krishna, 330, 362-3
— ^King of Heaven, 115
— ^labour, 270
— lamp of, 58
— ^law and, 40
—law of, 2, 86, 101, 121-2, 198, 333,
—law of life, 119, 121, 186-7, 199, 266
— law of our being, 3, 75, 120-2, 131
— law of our species, 2, 243
— ^law of the human race, 119, 1^^ t
— ^law of the regenerate man, 228
— ^law, supreme, 172, 266, 301
— ^legislation, 292
—lesson, 267, 297, 311, 446
— limitations, 99, 332
— ^limited, 310-1, 313, 343, 448
— ^limits, 322 ^
— ^living belief, 286, 288, 291, 299-
— ^living force, 200
— ^logical consequences, 87 „„
-love, 113, 118, 121-2, 126, 129-32,
106,181,190, 265, 343
— ^loyalty to, 325
— lynching, 115
— ^Alahabharata, 118, 120, 301
— ^Mahomed, 191
— ^man as Spirit, 311
— ^manifesto, 487 , o n rrn
— ^mankind, HI, 116> 121-2, »
334
— ^manual work, 439
— ^march to, 448 ‘
—masses, 30-1, 87, ogV
158, 108, 227, 243, 246, -^2, 26-,
265, 284-5, 291, 474
— mass movement, 485
—matchless force (weapon),
— mathematics of, 128
— means, 8, 331
— ^meat-eating, 322, 343
— message, 277
Non-violence — method, 280, 282, 287>
294, 305, 307, 358, 447, 482
— ^mightiest force, 180, 303
— military training, 38-9, 74, 79, 93
— ministers, 244
— minority, 131, 456, 474, 487
—miracle, 129-30, 144
— mi^ed, 266
— ^most perfect demonstration, 245
— ^movement, 334
— ^Muslims (Mussalmans), 7, 13, 322,
343 See also Mussalmans
— ^Mussolini, 174-5
— nations, 158-9, 180, 187, 199, 266
— ^Nazis, 203, 319-20, 471
— ^Negroes, 115-6, 127-8, 194
— ^Nehru, Jawaharlal, 310
— never-failing, 143
• — new fields, 284, 299
^no abject surrender, 294
— no age-limit, 130 ^
—no meek submission, 2
—non-co-operation, See Non-co-opera-
tion
^non-resistance, 61-3, 143
—Norway, 266-7, 273
— not a cloistered virtue, 243
— not a negative concept, 485
240, 243, 245, 291, 297, 334-6.
452-4,456
—of the helpless, 451
— of the highest type, 331
180-1, 154, I?. ”?■ 2.“' jj;
250, 270, 27o, 284, 371, 44
— mass scale, 113. 120, 432, 156
onlv true force, 114
_<,ijaoisatioi., 100^23|,5, 30^
322
^pacifism, See Pacifism
—passion, 276
— ^passive, 200, 2^®
^pathans, 153-5, 297-8
. — peace, 481
r;?c& », =02. 200.300, 335
z:KSKS’b!'252
Cplant^ol slosc ^^?i 5 ^^ 337.8
—Poland, 226-7, 278, 323, 337
—Police force, 331-3
506
INDEX
Non-violence-policv, 158, 200, 210, 230,
264, 267, 275-6, 334, 353, 447,
449, 458, 4S0-1
— apolitical sphere, 371
— political vreapon, 237
— ^politics, 292, 322
— ^positive, 364
— ^possessions, 134, 116, 119, 317, 328
— ^possibilities, 99, 153, 190, 282, 307
— ^potency, J146, 250, 265
—power of, 229, 234, 372, 452
- — ^Prahlad, 122
— ^preparation, 278, 296, 308, 454
— ^programme, 5, 291
■ — ^progressive, 310-11 ,
— propagation, 477
— ^punislanent, 42, 43
—pure, 265, 299, 300-1, 332
— Quran, 298
— ^Raiagopalachari, C., 286
— ^real, 452
— ^reconciling, 364
— ^refusal of military sendee, 106
— ^relative, 419
— religion of, 2, 3, 241
— researches, 380
— ^resistance, Sep Xon-violent resist-
ance ^
— resistance of the soul, 44, 318
— resistance, unarmed, 344
— right to preach, 478-9
—riots, 75-7, 134-5, 136-8, 139, 142,
230, 239, 246, 262, 276-7, 284-5,
311-2, SSI, 344-5
— sacrifice, 119, 122, 335
— sadhana, 289-91
— satyagraha, 40-3, 103, 317-8, 332,
475
— science of, 152, 308
— scope, 322, 343
— self-acting force, 113 ‘
—self-defence, 59, 94, 254, 260-1, 336
— ^self-government, 134
— self-immolation, 115, 134, 138, 142,
344, 453 /
— selflessness, 830
— self-purification, 111, 245
— self-respect, 318
— ^shield, 333
— Sikhs, 470
—Sindh, 246, 252, 362-4
- — social virtue, 179, 181
— ^socialism, 486
— society based on 197-9, 265, 292,
308-10, 331
—soldiers, 108-9, 284-5, 299, 306, 337
— soul force (power), 167
— soul, thing of the, 147
— sovereign remedy, 227, 473
—spinning wheel, 129, 243, 291, 302
-—spirit, 131, 197-8, 223, 456
— spiritual food, 135
— ^spIendour, 310
Non-^^olence•standa^d, 252
—State, 100-8, 265, 292, 323-4, 328,.
333, 4434, 469
— steadfastness, 317
—strength, 1-8, 94, 111, 134, 137, 252,
255, 277, 321, 372, 448, 451-3,.
466
— strictest, 325
— strongest force. See mightiest force
— struggle, 356
— sub-human species, 343
— subtlest force, 303
— suffering, 2, 43, 65
— Swaraj, 23, 28, 85, 130, 13840, 341,.
450, 459, 470
— Sweden, 266
— Switzerland, 107-9
— teacher, 290, 309
— teaching, SOS, 330
—technique, 131, 134, 192, 264, 364
, — terrorism, 250
— ^test, 288, 299, 312, 338, 455, 470
— thorough, 325
— ^torch, 276
— totalitarianism, 437
— ^training for, 95, 114-5, 129-3f, 140,-
142, 168, 187, 228, 230, 265, 271»
335-6, 439 ^
— ^training in arms. See military train-
ing
— ^triumph, 454
—true, 236, 240, 244, 276, 279, 289,.
292, 299, 328, 331
— true value of, 412
—truth, 40, 57, 68, 87, 105-6, 121, 127^
135
— unadulterated, 140, 143, 244, 264,.
275, 358, 452
— united action, 192
— ^iversal, 28, 200, 303, 308-11, 322,.
339 '
— ^unlimited, 343
— utmost (uttermost), 456, 471
— victory, 111
— ^village economy, 243
— ^\dllage indiistri^, 302
— ^violence, 1, 3, 6, 13, 27, 30, 43, 57,.
60, 65, 71, 77, 80, 86, 94, 99-101,
103, 105, 109, 111-2, 129-33,
136-7, 139-40, 146-7, 149, 159,.
175, 187, 191, 194, 197-8, 205,
227, 230, 239-40, 251, 273, 278,.
285, 292, 303-4, 316, 324-6,.
331-2, 335-6, 394-5, 398, 468, 470^
481
— ^virtue, 448
— ^votaries, 244, 332, 335
—war, 87, 121, 125-6, 143, 280-1, 294,
340-2, 417-8, 446, 473, 476-9
— weakening, 394
— ^weapon, 331, 372-3, 446, 455, 474,
—West, the, 118, 147, 168-9, 2G7, 811,
364
INDEX
Non-vioIence*white art, 228
— ^Tvhole creation, 113, 322
— ^women, 40, 42, 59, 7C, 109, 119, 122,
130, 153, 155-6, 236, 323
— ^working of, 321
— ^orld, 2, 207, 228, 277, 299, 305, 317,
364
— young men, 119
Non-violent resistance, 29, 44, 71, 96,
128, 143, 152-3, 167-8, 170, 175, 202,
235, 250-1, 264-6, 269-70, 273. 300,
344, 348, 357-8, 364, 389, 397-9, 418,
459, 487
Norway, 266-7, 273, 481
Occident, 431
O’dwyerism, 7
Old Testament, 253
Orientals, 425-6, 431
Os^etzky, 179
Ottoman Empire, 2f 9
Oxford Group Movement, 208
Pacifism, 38, 69, 02, 123, 143-4, 172, 183,
203-4, 238, 256-7, 380-2, 424, 435,
440-1
Pacifists, See Pacifism
Paderewski, 217
Page, Kirb 3 % 56-7, 203 ,
Pal, Bipin Chandra, 12-3
Palestine, 50, 159-60, 163, 205-C, 440,
443, 445
Panda vas, 120
Pan-Islamism, 12
Pant, G. B., 324
Parvati, 338 ‘
Passive resistance, 21, 70, 128, 150, 231,
235, 272, 423, 425
Patanjali, 338
Patel, Sardar Vallabhbhai, 98, 288-6,
323, 371, 395
Pathans, 4, 6, 153-5, 297-8, 325
Paton, W., 169
Paul, St., 113, 424, 464
Pax Internaiionali 83
Peace, 191, 212
— ^America, See America
— at Munich, 454
—brigade, 144-0, 246, 275
— ^British Empire, 126, 210
—cats and mice, 81
— cause of, 81
— China, See China
— Christ’s Gospel, 179/ 191 ^
— communal, 110, 133, 470
— conscientious objectors, 202-3
— dictated, 223
— disarmament, 472
— doctrine, 120
— doom of, llG-7
— foundation, 381
— ^Europe, 147, 149, 152
507
Peace, -France, 200
— ^freedom, 234, 446
— Gandhi ji, See Gandhiji
— Germany, 55
—Gita, 124
— God, 250
— gospel of, 64
—Hitler, 233, 272
— ^honour, 149, 151, 454
— imperialism, 219, 247
— India, See India
* — international, 176, 197
— Islam, 470
— Jews, 207
— Kellogg Pact, 89
—lovers of, 78, 81, 249, 416, 475
— manly, 262
— ^man’s dream, 37
— ^messenger, 145
— ^methods, 126
— mission, 147
— movement, 55, 118, 250, 364
— Muslims, 470-
— Napoleon, 82
— nations, 65, 83
— new order, 294
— non-co-operation, 358
— ^non-violence, See Non-violence
— ^non-violent army, 134
— of the grave, 262
— organization, 366-7
— ^pacifist, 381
— patched-up, 294
— ^permanent, 116
— ^Poland, 217
— Prince of, 117
— ^propagation, 342
— rebellion, 475
— ^riots, 261-2
— ^Russia, 152
-r-Sheppard, Dick, 121
— societies, 108
— society based on, ..258
— soldiers of, 153-4, 366-7
— sufferings, 57
— truth, 57
— victories, 294
—war, 257, 294, 446
— ^war resisters, 69, 86, 88, 241, 248
— ^warriors of, 101
—West, 83, 91, 147, 417
— women, 89, 156
— ^world, 37, 82, 85, 92, 116, 150,
156, 210, 232-3, 327, 334, 407,
428, 459-61, 470, 472
Peace Pledge Union, 201-2
Persians, 132
Peter, 382
Petit, Mithubai, 98
Physical culture, 38-9
— force, See Brute force
— sciences. See Science
Polak, 207
508
INDEX
Poland, 47, 55, 216-8, 225-7, 232, 248,
250, 273, 323-4, 337-8, 444, 481
Poles, See Poland
Police force, 28, 42, 133-4, 136, 139, 144,
164, 197, 246, 252, 258, 312, 324-5,
831-3, 430-3, 460-1
Polish Corridor, See Poland
Political awakening, 483
— ^power, 483
— struggle for freedom, 483
PoUard, F, F., S05
Ponsonby, 431
Prahlad, 122, 477
Prayer, 156, 170, 191, 212,1217, 251
Princes, 136, 287, 332, 350, 370,
452, 466, 476
Pritam, 311
Prithvisingh, 289
Piitt, J), N., 465
Prohibition, 97, 270
Prophet, (Mahomed), 11
Pro\’incial autonomy, 464
Puniab, 6, 13-4, 25, 464, 475
Purists, 395
Pyarelal, 200, 207
•Quakers, 247, 437
Quaker International Centre, 247
Qiiii India, 414
Quran, 121, 298
Radhakrishnan, 249
Hajagopalachari, C., 98, 284, 286-7, 323,
354-6, 395, 467
Hajendraprasad, 98, 243
Rajkot fasts, 411
Rajputs, 4, 6
Rama, 2, 63, 303, 326-7, 477
Ramaj'ana, 124, ST6
Ramayana (of Tulsidas), 326-7
Ravana, 2, 63, 327, 329
Ravishankar Maharaj, 302
Reconstruction, 584
Red Cross, 73, 108
Reh'gious resistance, See Civil resistance
Republic, 386
Rhodesia, 183
Riots, See Communal riots
Holland, Romain, 319, 422
Rome, 425
Roosevelt, President, 209
Rosz, Colin, 426
Round Table Conferences, 268
Rowlatt Act, 25, 268, 297,
Huh 26
Rumania, 225
Runciman, I/ord, 438
Ruskin, 413
Russia, 7, 26-7, 57, 67, 78, 85, 101-3,
152, 198, 227, 230, 244, 253, 407, 413,
430, 441, 444, 460-1, 481, 486, 488
Salisbury, Lord, 64
Salt famine, 403
Samuel, Lord, 207
Sankange, T. D., 183
Sapni, Tej Bahadur, 12
Sardul Singh, 467
Satan, 4
Satya Deva, 424
Satyagraha, 2, 28, 41-5, 70, 95, 103,
153, 162-3, 174, 196, 204, 216, 264, 269,
272, 297, 392, 3I7-S, 332, 334, 347,
352, 354, 374, 3S2, 386, 411, 434-5,
437, 440-2, 448, 459, 463, 474
Sayre, J. 92, 94
Science, 143, 163, 272, 301, 429, 435
Scorched earth, 388-90
Self-defence, 59-60, 93, 202, 247, 253-5,
259-61,278,336-7,447
Self-determination, 219, 221
Self-existence, 460
Self-extinction, 463
Self-government, 36, 134, 444, 451
Self-immolation, 43, 115, 138, 142, 344,
453
Self-purification, 32, 42} 111, 114, 245
Self-respect, 318
Self-restraint, 327, 350, 463-4, 475
Self-suppression, 463
Sen, K. C., 391
Sermon on the Mount, 48, 192, 381, 420
Servant, The, 4
Sevagram, 371, 387, 407 ^
Shah, Purushottam, 75
Shelley, 173
Sheppard, Canon (Rick), 117, 120-3,
201
Shiva, 338
Shraddhanandji, 258-9
Siegfried Bine, 236
Sikhs, 4, 6, 236, 325, 349, 4S4
Simon Commlssioa, 268
Simplicity, 30, 34
Sindh, 246-7, 251-5, 258-60, 336-7, 362-4,
464
Singapore, 375, 414
Sinn Feinism, 3
Sita, 329
Sitaramayya, B. Pattabhi, 98
Slavery, 338, 401
Smith, E., 169
Socialism, 349, 423, 426
Society of Friends, 364
Soga, ilina, 183
Soldiers, 1, 6, 8-9, 13, 16-7, 28, 63, 101,
1(14> 106, 109, 153, 226-8, 236, 240,
258, 265, 273, 280, 285, 299, 300, 319,
337, 356-7, 360, 375-9, 391-3, 434,
481
Soul, Rignity of the. See Soul force
—force, 2, 30, 03, 82-3, 167, 239,
284, 317-8, 373, 360, 424
— Science of 143 ,,
Sovereignty, 197
INDEX
509
Spain, 47, 150, 164, 220, 222, 250, 207,
434
Sparta, 425
Spinning, 369
—wheel, 33-4, 97-8, 103, 129, 131,
243, 209, 289, 291, 302, 370, 449
Spirit, Commonwealth of the, 37
— Strength of the, Sec Soul force
— V. Sword, 82-8
Stable, Justice, 4G5
Stalin, 129
Star, the, 272
State, 34, 48, 55, 80, 106-8, 200, 264-5,
292, 328, 333, 425, 431, 460, 408-9
Statesman, The, 117-8, 120-2, 179, 181,
358-0
Steiner, K., 128
Stephenson, 180
Stimson, 471-2
Stokes, S., 4-5
Strikes, 468-9
Stnink, 175
Swadeshi, 5, 40
Swaraj, 0, 12, 15-8, 23-4, 28-30, 33,
38, 61, 72, 77, 85, 95, 130, 136,
138-40, 243, 259, 289, 291, 309-11,
324, 334, 341-2, 351, 353, 420, 450,
459, 465-6, 408, 476
Sweden, 206
Swinton, General, 00
Switzerland, 107-9
Symonds, 131
Syria, 50-8, 444
Takali, 370
Takaoka, 177-8
Tamerlane, 109
Tammany Hall methods, 482
Tao, 148
Tapasya, 341
Taxes, Refusal to pay, 432
Tcherkolf, V., 78, 80
Tema, S. S., 183, 192
Ten Days That Shook the World, 400
Terrorism, 68-9, 117, 120, ' 174, 250
363, 440
Tliakcrsy, Lady, 411
The Jexvish Contribution to Civilization
(Roth), 103
The New Immigration (Roberts), 62
The Power of Non-violence (Gregg) 118
The llcvolution of Destruction (H.
Rauschning), 320
The Story of My Experiments xvith Truth
(GandhijO, 124 <
The Survey Graphic, 380
The World Tomorrow, 417
Theol, 48
Thcrmopylrc, 109
Thorne, S. J., 364
Tliunnan, Hr-, 123-0
Thurman, Mrs., 115
Tibet, 89
Tilak, 808
Times of India, The, 356
Timur, Prof. 800
Tobias, 127
Tolstoy, 78, 100, 418, 420, 422, 426, 429
487
Totalitarianism, 159, 177, 230, 357, 487
Trans-Jordan, 443
Transvaal, 108, 162
Travancore, 128
Truth, 20, 31, 40-1, 57, 63, 68, 75, 85,
87, 103, lOG-7, 110, 113, 121, 127,
135, 177, I9I, 203, 206, 228, 242,
282, 295, 301, 808, 311, 313, 315, 817,
320, 357, 414, 444, 449-50, 476-7,
482
Truth, CO ^
Tsheka Ulibajet (Saprudin), 48
Turkey, 17, 25, 225 „
Turks, See Turkey
Unarmed resistance, See Non-jviolent
resistance
Union Jack, 39
United Kingdom, See Britain
Unto this last, 413
Untouchability, 18, 28, 90-7, 110, 126,
128, 159, 171, 269, 332, 469
Upanishads, 124
U. S. A., See America
U. S. S. R., See Russia
Vaishnavas, 843
Venkatappayya, 98
Versailles, Treaty of, 176, 203, 219
Vibhishana, 826
Viceroy, 8, 136, 213-5, 217, 231,
240, 282, 293-4, 326, 345, 350-1, 859-
62, 364, 452, 462, 464-5, 467, 409-70,
473, 475
Vidyarthi, Ganesh Shankar, 252
Village Government, 387
— industries, 84-5, 269, 302, 439, 450
• — migration to, 385
— ^regeneration, 110
— re-organization, 385
— Swaraj, 880-7
Violence, 230, 314, 381, 899-400, 402,
484-5
— action, 133
- — active, 172
—-Allies, 207
« — ^America, 198
— armament, 103-4
— army, 130
— ^badge, 335
— basis of society, 266
— begets violence, 182
— ^black art, 228
— Bolshevism, 27
— ^braveiy, 835
— ^British power (rule), 133, 141
. — calculated, 161
510
INDEX
Violence-capacity for offering, 112
--children, 153, 319, 329
— <*ivil disobedience, 472
— clergy, 424
— conduct, 393
—Congress, 228, 235-6, 239, 244, 344,
352-3
— cowardice, 1
— deadly poison, 301
— defeat. 111
— defence, 1, 40, 42, 202, 237, 250,
260-1, 263-4, 423, 484
— democracy, 198, 202, 269-70
— diminishing, 311
— doctrine, 43
— doctrine of the sword, 3
— doom of, 311
— drift towards, 94
— effectiveness (efficacy), 129, 266
— end of. 111 ^
— ending a calf’s life, 131
— ^England, 19S
— enthronement, 198
1 — equipment, 326
— ^Europe, 30, 48
— exploitation, 30
—faith, 191, 481
— ^Fascism, 218, 474
— father, 99
— fear, 334
— forces, 88
— ^foreign invasion, 325
— ^France, 198
—freedom, 212, 248, 428
— ^freedom of speech, 473
— ^fury, 278
— iiitility* ^47, 211, 266, 272, 435
— Gandhiji, 8, 27, 41, 75, 77, 101, 125,
242
— Germany, 149, 198, 266
■ ' Gita, 330
— glorification, 218
— Government, 4, 467
—hatred, 263, 266
—Hitler, 129, 149, 161, 203, 290
— ^hooligans, 344
— ^imperialism, 474
—India, 112, 211,236,
— inefficacy, 446
—Italy, 149, 198
— Jews, 172
— justice, 211
— ^killing, 80
— law, 40
— ^law of the beast, 223
— ^law of the brute, 2
— ^legislation, 292
— ^liberty, 468
— ^logic of, 468
— ^love, 131
—lying, 57
— ^man as animal, 311
—mania, 416
Violence-mass disobedience, 468-9
— ^masses, 30-1
— means, 145, 201
— mental, 256
—method, 1, 27, 58, 105, 137, 307
—mob, 127, 244, 448
— ^moral, 4
— mother of, 57
— ^lunich, 149
— ^lussalmans, 13
— ^Mussolini, 129
— ^nations, civilized, 89
* — ^Nazism, 218, 474
— ^non-violence. See Non-violence
— Norway, 266
— of the brave, 289
— offensive, 250
— oppressor, 77
— organized, 150, 199, 272
— ^party, 353
— Pathans, 297-8
— ^physical, 4, 256
— played out, 211
—Poland, 227
— ^possession, 72
— ^power. 111
— practice, 129
— sprayer, 191
— ^preaching, 463
— ^refusal to resort to, 201
— ^resistance, 125, 128, 175-6, 202, 390
— Russia, 198, 244
— saturation point, 311 '
— school of, 3
— science, 203
— scientific, 150
— self-defence, 201, 260, 336-7
—Sind, 363
— Sinn Feinism, 3
— soldiers, 109, 306
— spirit, 336
—Stalin, 129"
—State, 89, 468
— strength, 94
— struggle, 141
— submission to, 427
— success, 30
— supremacy, seeming, 94
— sjTnbol of, 103
— system, based on, 100, 223
— technique, 149
— terrorists, 449
— tornado, 169
— training, 228, 2C0, 278
— triumph, 149
— truth, 57
— unadulterated, 140
— undiluted, 148^
— unpractical, 202
— ^unscientific, 203
— ^imtruth, 58, 73, 105
— un-violent, 100
—war, 70-1, 125, 202, 222-3
INDEX
511
“Violencc-Tvcakncss, 04
— ^weapons, 189, 297, 835
—West, 147
— Tvemen, 40, 42, 109
—world, 2, 88, 169, 197, 202, 224,
840, 4IC, 453^
— ^wrong, 201
VioTent resistance, 358
Vishwamitra Rishi, 402
Vyasa, 88, 31C
War, 148, 150-1, 162, 166, 100, 197, 212,
86G, 874 876, 880-81, SOO, 401, 439,
484, 488
— aggression, 183
— armament, 446
*— ^rt, 316
— ^bloody, 334
/—•British Empire, 126, 417, 422, 433
— brutalizing, 280
— children, 222, 270, 319-20, 434,
464
— China, See China
—chivalry, 810
civil 428
—civilization, 438
coloured races, 418, 435
—conflagration, 342-8
— Congress, 150, 210-1, 214, 218,224,
847
— crushing burdens, 446
— curse, 277, 280
— degradation, 446
— delusion and folly, 118
— democracy, 269-70, 280, 435, 464
—destruction, 217, 314, 316, 434, 438,
446
— destruction of liberty, 201-2, 446
— dictatorsbip, 152
— clcctro-tcchnical 425
— engines of, 430
—England, 152, 155, 417, 432
— Europe, 419, 445-6
—exploitation, 86-8
— Fascism, 218, 430
— food-stuff, 868-9
— ^for freedom, 56, 248, 446
—futility, 82, 85, 128, 203
— Gandhiji’s opposition to, 68-75, 78-
82, 86-8, 160-1, 182, 212, 214,
857
— Germany, 162, 207-8, 819
— Gita, 124
— glorification of, 218
— harmful, 427
— hatred of, 427
— ^Hinduism, 123
— ^Hitler, 210
— horrors, 00, 84-5, 04,* 120, 155, 183,
222, 227, 248, 434-5
—humanitarian, 383
— humanizing, 07
— imperialism, 222-3, 232, 446
War-India, See India
— ^industrialism, 425
— Jews, 207
— lying, See — untruth
— ^Manabharata, 816
— mankind, 280
— masses, 474
— menace, 423
— ^method of ending, 197
— modem 410, 426, 428-9, 433-4,
438
— ^Moloch, 227
— moral support, 314, 316
— morality, 268
— morally wrong, 427
— ^motives, 233, 316, 388
— national, 430, 459, 465
— ^Nazism, 218
— new order, 204-5
— no love in, 148
— no war movement, Sec — ^war against
— non-co-operation, 358
— non-violence, tSee Non-violence
— of defence, 204, 204, 429
• — of exploitation, 431
— of principle, 435
— opposition to, 68-9, 71, 73-5, 78-82,
86-8, 202-4, 340
— outlawry, 89
— ^panic, 270-1, 278-9
— peace, 250, 295, 446
— ^personal participation, 431
— political, 883
— preparations, 92, 95, 276
—Red Cross, 75, 108, 431
— renunciation of, 85, 89-90
— resistance, means of, 427
— resisters, 389, 391-2
— ^revolution, social, 429
— science of, 152, 316
— Sermon on the Mount, 48
— social struggle, 441
— spoils, 284, 209
— substitute for, 473, 478
— suffering nations, 404
— tax, 401
—‘to end war’, 202, 204, 230, 435
— totalitarian, 438
— unmitigated evil, 270
— untruth, 316
— venereal disease, 67
— victories, 294
— violence, 70, 80, 125, 148, 169, 202,
810, 446
— ^war against, 49, 74, 78, 80-1, 84,
87, 91-2, 109, 117-8, 120-1, 125-6,
188, 202-3, 240, 424-6, 434
— war rcsisters, See war against
—West, 37, 84, 88, 90, 117, 417-8,
420
— wickedness, 68
— ^womcn, See Women
—world, 37, 44, 231, 424
^12
INDEX
War-wrong act. See — bad in essence;
Washington, George, 21
Wellington, 2
West, 200, 380
— civilization, 102
— clergy, 424
— Congress, iS'ec Congress
— culture, 102
—democracy, 219, 230, 269
■ — economic bre^ikdown, 439
— Gandbiji, 20, 32-8, 36-7, 41,14.7,
157, 212
— Germany, 437
— glamour, 94
— India, See India
— ^industrialism, 425
— ^invasion, 102
— Japan, 178
— Jews, 163
— Jdiadi, 439
— machines, 418
— military spirit, 96
— ^moral rearmament, 208
— nations, 91, 94, 158, 169
— ^non-violence, See Non-violence
— ^pacifism, 172
— peace, See Peace
— progress, 102
— ^Russia, 102
— scientists, 341
— seekers after truth, 40
— spinning wheel, S3
— States, 42S
— starving millions, 29
— ^violence, 146
— votaries of, 481
— ^war. See War
—world, 29, 37, 83, 102
What War MeaTis (Timperley), 182
W?iich Way to Peace ?
(B. Russdl), 435
Working Committee, (Congress), 15-6,
135, 139, 142, 150, 210-1, 213, 218-9,
227, 230, 235, 240-5, 274-9, 283-8,
290-1, 295-6, 298-9, 309, 314, 323, 346,
348, 351, 354-5, 412, 445-7, 454-7, 460,
462, 470, 474, 478, 480
World, 2, 35, 88, 93, 103, 172, 176, 201,
237, 245, 269, 273, 301, SOS, 315, 325,
327, 407, 446, 453-5, 471, 473
—Allies, 23S, 267
— armaments, 93, 429, 471
— armed defence, 247
— Balkanized, 84
— barharism, 459
— Britain, 88, 238, 351
— China, See China
— commonwealth of the spirit, 37
— Congress, 227, 234
—conscience, 84
World-crisis, 212, 223, 447
— deliverance, 277
— democracy, 220
— dependent races, 240
— disarmament, 459
— ^Englishmen, 45, 224
—exploited nations, 224, 233
— external aggression, 446
— France, 272
— ^freedom, 223-4, 449
— Gandhiji, See Gandhiji
— ^historv, 425, 429
—Hitler, 214, 216, 273
— imperialism, 223, 234-5
— ^India, See Bidia
— ^industry, greatest, 92
— internal disorder, 440
— ^international, 267
« — Jews, 163, 165
— militarization, 409
— nations, 406
- — new consciousness, 32
— new order, 221-2, 294-5
— non-AdoIence’ See Non-violence
— ^ce, 37, *81, 85, Itl, 116, 150, 156,
210, 233, 323, 439-60, 470
— politics, 485
— ^progress, 95, 166, 460
— remaking, 33
— min, 197
— satya^aha, 103, 437
— salvation 2 ,
— self-destruction, 459
- — spinning wheel, 291
—teachers, 191, 20i
— unity, 433
—war, 36, 92, 231, 268, 277, 417, 427
— Western, 101
—whole, 32, 37, 45, 84, 155, 197, 204
World TomorrosD, The, 92
World War, (1914-18) 1, 19-25, 39, 56-7,
68-73,75, 106, 109, 125-6, 160, 202,
218,220,248, 267-9, 357, 416-7, 422-3,
428, 433-5
World War, The present, 224-5, 227-9,
232-4, 23S-9, 248-50, 257, 267, 270-
1, 280-2, 294-6, 298, 307, 311, 314,
345-53, 356-62, 445, 462-77
Wu, Y. T., 183
Yerawda prison, 411
Young India, 17, 38, 42, 46, 52, 54, 78,
89, 91, 95, 259, 427, 442
Yudhishthira, 316
Yugoslavia, 481
Zamindars, 350, 452, 466, 47G
Zulu RebelHon, 1, 21-2, 25, 73, 100, 18S,
195, 416
Zulus, 419
END
Live Music
Archive
Librivox
Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland
Museum of Art
Internet
Arcade
Console Living Room
Open Library
American
Libraries
TV News
Understanding
9/11